[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 37 (Friday, March 7, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3370-S3373]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself and Mrs. Murray):
S. 574. A bill to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act
to toll the 5-year limit for assistance under the temporary assistance
to needy families program for recipients who live in a State that is
experiencing significant increases in unemployment; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to reintroduce legislation,
the Unemployment Protection for Low-Income Families on TANF Act, or
UPLIFT Act, that will protect low-income families who are transitioning
from welfare to work from losing their welfare benefits during periods
of high unemployment. I want to thank my colleague, Senator Murray, for
joining me in cosponsoring this important legislation.
Forcing families off welfare during a recession because they cannot
find a job lacks commonsense. In fact, during an economic downturn,
which we are in right now, low-skilled workers and recently employed
workers are more likely to lose their jobs, and unfortunately, only 30
to 40 percent of former welfare recipients who become unemployed
qualify for Unemployment Insurance. Furthermore, there are 1.5 million
fewer jobs today than there were a year ago, when the economic downturn
began, making it increasingly difficult for these individuals to find
employment, particularly full-time employment.
A single parent receiving welfare assistance while working 30 hours a
week who loses her job during a recession should not be penalized. For
families like this, welfare is the only unemployment insurance they
have. But, under current law, federal welfare time limits and work
requirements continue to apply during periods of high-unemployment.
The Unemployment Protection for Low-Income Families through TANF Act,
or UPLIFT Act, would require states to disregard federal TANF
assistance for all recipients when the national unemployment rate
reaches or exceeds 6.5 percent or when a state unemployment rises by
1.5 percentage points over a three-month period.
Every percentage point increase in unemployment results in a welfare
caseload increase of 5 percent. In addition to enacting a strong
contingency fund for states experiencing high unemployment and
increased caseloads, Congress must act to ensure that welfare
recipients are not time-limited off of welfare when the economy is weak
and jobs are in short supply. In addition to promoting self-
sufficiency, TANF programs should be a safety net for low-income
families who are unable to find work or meet their needs.
My legislation will help parents who are trying to transition from
welfare to work, but are unable to find work during a weak economy, to
provide for their families without the fear of losing cash assistance.
The TANF program is not only about moving people from welfare to work,
it is also about reducing poverty and helping families in need.
While welfare reform has succeeded at moving thousands of people into
work, its success has come in strong economic times. As people reach
their 5-year time limits, we can only hope they will be able to find
jobs in what is now a more difficult economy. The reality is that many
states are experiencing high unemployment right now, making it
extremely difficult for welfare recipients to find good paying full-
time jobs. We shouldn't penalize people who are trying to transition
from welfare to work just because the economy is bad. We need to
continue to help these families build their skills and find employment
when times are tough.
As Congress acts to reauthorize the TANF program I ask my colleagues
to support legislation that will protect families transitioning from
welfare to work from losing their benefits during a recession.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 574
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Unemployment Protection for
Low-Income Families on TANF Act of 2003'' or the ``UPLIFT Act
of 2003''.
SEC. 2. DISREGARD OF MONTHS OF ASSISTANCE RECEIVED DURING
PERIODS OF HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT.
(a) In General.--Section 408(a)(7) of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 608(a)(7)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(H) Disregard of assistance received during periods of
high unemployment.--
``(i) In general.--In determining the number of months for
which an adult has received assistance under a State or
tribal program funded under this part, the State or tribe
shall disregard any month in which the State is determined to
be a high unemployment State for that month.
``(ii) Definition of high unemployment state.--For purposes
of clause (i), a State shall be considered to be a high
unemployment State for a month if it satisfies either of the
following criteria:
``(I) State rate of unemployment.--The average--
``(aa) rate of total unemployment (seasonally adjusted) in
the State for the period consisting of the most recent 3
months for which data are available has increased by the
lesser of 1.5 percentage points or by 50 percent over the
corresponding 3-month period in either of the 2 most recent
preceding fiscal years; or
[[Page S3371]]
``(bb) insured unemployment rate (seasonally adjusted) in
the State for the most recent 3 months for which data are
available has increased by 1 percentage point over the
corresponding 3-month period in either of the 2 most recent
preceding fiscal years.
``(II) National rate of unemployment.--The average rate of
total unemployment (seasonally adjusted) for all States for
the period consisting of the most recent 3 months for which
data for all States are published equals or exceeds 6.5
percent.
``(iii) Duration.--A State that is considered to be a high
unemployment State under clause (ii) for a month shall
continue to be considered such a State until the rate that
was used to meet the definition as a high unemployment State
under that clause for the most recently concluded 3-month
period for which data are available, falls below the level
attained in the 3-month period in which the State first
qualified as a high unemployment State under that clause.''.
______
By Mr. INOUYE:
S. 575. A bill to amend the Native American Languages Act to provide
for the support of Native American language survival schools, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to amend
the Native American Languages Act to provide authorization for the
establishment of Native American Language Survival Schools. I am
pleased to be joined in the co-sponsorship of this measure by the
Chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Senator Ben
Nighthorse Campbell.
As part of the United States' forced assimilation policies towards
Native Americans in the 1880s, the Federal Government initiated a
system of off-reservation boarding schools. Native American Children
were forcibly taken from their families and transported hundreds of
miles to schools were they were subjected to efforts to eradicate all
vestiges of their cultural background: their hair was cut
notwithstanding the religious importance of hair length in most native
cultures; their clothes were replaced with military-style uniforms;
they were forbidden to practice their native religions; and they were
punished for speaking their native languages. This effort to eradicate
Indian culture was unsuccessful and the United States eventually
abandoned this policy. However, the long-lasting impacts have separated
generations of Native Americans from their native languages.
The Native American Languages Act of 1990 officially repudiated the
policies of the past and declared that ``it is the policy of the United
States to preserve, protect, and promote the rights and freedom of
Native Americans to use, practice, and develop Native American
languages.'' The Native American Languages Act Amendments of 1992
amended the Native American Programs Act of 1974 to establish a grant
program to support Native American language projects which would be
administered by the Administration for Native Americans, Department of
Health and Human Services. This bill would bring the Nation one step
closer to assuring the preservation and revitalization of Native
American languages by supporting the development of Native American
Language Survival Schools.
The purpose of this bill is to address the effects of past
discrimination against Native American language speakers and to support
revitalization of such languages through the development of Native
American Language Survival Schools and Native American language Nests.
In addition, the bill seeks to demonstrate the positive effects of
Native American Language Survival Schools on the academic success of
Native American students and their mastery of standard English. An
important component in language revitalization is family involvement
with the Native American Language Survival Schools, as well as
educational exchanges among Native American Language Survival Schools.
Furthermore, the bill provides support for Native American Language
Survival School facilities and endowments, the development of local and
national teaching models, and the creation of a university-level
support center system for Native American Language Survival Schools.
______
By Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Hatch,
Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Kyl, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Cochran, Ms. Stabenow,
Mr. Fitzgerald, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Reid, and Mr. Sununu):
S. 576. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
a shorter recovery period for the depreciation of certain leasehold
improvements, to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I rise today, joined again by my colleague
Mr. Nickles and many others, to introduce important legislation to
provide a 10-year depreciation life for leasehold improvements.
Leasehold improvements are the alterations to leased space made by a
building owner as part of the lease agreement with a tenant.
This is a common sense move that will help bring economic development
to cities and towns around the country that want to revitalize their
business districts. It will allow owners of commercial property to
remodel their buildings to better meet the business needs of their
communities--whether for new computer ports and data lines for high-
tech entrepreneurs, or better lighting and sales space for retailers.
In actual commercial use, leasehold improvements typically last as
long as the lease--an average of 5 to 10 years. However, the Internal
Revenue Code requires leasehold improvements to be depreciated over 39
years--the life of the building itself.
Economically, this makes no sense. The owner receives taxable income
over the life of the lease, yet can only recover the costs of the
improvements associated with that lease over 39 years--a rate nearly
four times slower. This preposterous mismatch of income and expenses
causes the owner to incur an artificially high tax cost on these
improvements.
The bill we are introducing today will correct this irrational and
uneconomic tax treatment by shortening the cost recovery period for
certain leasehold improvements from 39 years to a more realistic 10
years. The proposal being offered today would apply to property placed
in service after September 10, 2004, in order to provide a smooth
transition from the temporary bonus depreciation system enacted as part
of the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002.
This legislation would more closely align the expenses incurred to
construct improvements with the income they generate over the term of
the lease. By reducing the cost recovery period, the expense of making
these improvements could fall more into line with the economics of a
commercial lease transaction, and more building owners would be able to
adapt their buildings to fit the needs of today's business tenant.
It is good for the economy to keep existing buildings commercially
viable. When older buildings can serve tenants who need modern,
efficient commercial space, there is less pressure for developing
greenfields in outlying areas. Americans are concerned about preserving
open space, natural resources, and a sense of neighborhood. The current
law 39-year cost recovery period for leasehold improvements is an
impediment to reinvesting in existing properties and communities.
Shortening the recovery period will make renovation and
revitalization of business properties more attractive. That will be
good not just for property owners, but also for the economic
development professionals who are working hard every day to attract new
businesses to empty downtown storefronts or aging strip malls. And it
will be good for the architects and contractors who carry out the
renovations.
I urge all Senators to join us in supporting this legislation to
provide rational depreciation treatment for leasehold improvements.
Mr. NICKLES. Mr. President, today I am joining my colleague from
North Dakota, Mr. Conrad, in introducing legislation to provide that
leasehold improvements are depreciated over 10 years instead of the
current-law 39 years. Leasehold improvements are modifications to the
interior of rental space, either office or retail space, not
residential real estate, made by a building owner as part of a lease
agreement with a tenant. These improvements include electrical and
communications outlets, data ports, floor coverings, fire and security
systems, and internal walls.
Under the current depreciation system, leasehold improvements to
rental property are depreciated over the same time period as the
building itself--39 years. However, this 39 year depreciable life does
not reflect the actual
[[Page S3372]]
life of these improvements. Lease terms average 7 to 10 years for
office space and 3 to 5 years for retail space. Building owners
typically must remove any leasehold improvements they have made to a
property at the end of the lease term. Or, in the case of a lease
renewal, tenants frequently demand that owners make improvements to the
property as a condition of renewing the lease. Requiring business
owners to depreciate these improvements over 39 years leads to a
mismatch of income and expenses, thereby increasing the tax consequence
of making such improvements. The long depreciation period simply makes
no economic sense.
I believe that our tax laws should be updated to treat leasehold
improvements in a more rational manner. That is why my colleague and I
are introducing legislation to reduce the depreciable life of these
improvements from 39 years to 10 years. By reducing the time period
over which leasehold improvements are depreciated, our bill will more
accurately align income and expenses related to rental property, and
will mitigate the tax disincentives to modernizing commercial
buildings.
In last year's economic stimulus bill Congress provided some relief
to owners of rental property by allowing a 30 percent depreciation
bonus for qualified leasehold improvements. However, this relief is
only partial and is temporary. I look forward to working with my
colleagues to enact my legislation that will provide more rational tax-
treatment of leasehold improvements on a permanent basis. By so doing,
we will take an incremental step toward modernizing the tax code's
outdated depreciation rules.
______
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Gregg, and Mr.
Sununu):
S. 577. A bill to establish the Freedom's Way National Heritage Area
in the States of Massachusetts and New Hampshire, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to
establish the Freedom's Way National Heritage Area in New Hampshire and
Massachusetts. The bill is cosponsored by Senator Kennedy, Senator
Gregg and Senator Sununu.
The bill proposes to establish a national heritage area including 36
communities in Massachusetts and six communities in New Hampshire. The
area has important cultural and natural legacies that are important to
New England and the entire Nation. I want to highlight just a few of
the reasons I believe this designation makes sense.
The Freedom's Way is an ideal candidate because it is rich in
historic sties, trails, landscapes and views. The land and the area's
resources are pieces of American history and culture. The entire
region, and especially places like Lexington and Concord, is important
to our country's founding and our political and philosophical
principles. Within the 42 communities are truly special places. These
include the Minuteman National Historic Park, more than 40 National
Register Districts and National Historic Landmarks, the Great Meadows
National Wildlife Refuge, Walden Pond State Reservation, Gardener State
Park, Harvard Shaker Village and the Shirley Shaker Village.
In addition, there is strong grassroots support for this designation.
The people of these communities organized themselves in this effort and
have now turned to us for assistance. I hope we can provide it.
Supporters include elected officials, people dedicated to preserving a
small piece of American and New England history, and local business
leaders. It is an honor to help their cause.
Finally, I am very pleased that Senators from both Massachusetts and
New Hampshire have embraced this proposal. I thank Senators Kennedy,
Gregg, and Sununu.
______
By Mr. INOUYE (for himself, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Akaka, and Ms.
Cantwell):
S. 578. A bill to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to include
Indian tribes among the entities consulted with respect to activities
carried out by the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Government Affairs.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that
would amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to include Indian tribal
governments amongst the governmental entities that are consulted with
respect to activities carried out by the Secretary of the Department of
Homeland Security. This bill is entitled the ``Tribal Government
Amendments to the Homeland Security Act of 2002'', and I am pleased to
be joined in the sponsorship of this measure by the Chairman of the
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, as
well as our colleagues Senator Daniel Akaka, and Senator Maria
Cantwell.
The amendments proposed in this measure were developed in
consultation with the Senate Government Affairs Committee in the last
session of the Congress but were not included in the final version of
the Act because of the procedural posture of the bill as it came to the
Senate from the House of Representatives.
There are 260 miles of tribal lands which form our northern and
southern borders with Canada and Mexico, and along those border lands,
tribal governments are the principal and frequently the only law
enforcement presence with the capacity to protect those borders and to
assure the safety of our homeland. In addition, there are hundreds of
miles of tribal lands that border the waters surrounding the United
States, and there too, tribal law enforcement is the first line of
defense for purposes of homeland security.
In the Homeland Security Act of 2002, tribal governments are included
in the definition of ``local governments''. As we all know, local
governments are political subdivisions of the States. In contrast,
tribal governments are recognized as separate sovereigns under the
United States Constitution that do not derive their sovereign status
from the States, and accordingly, we believe that Federal law should
continue to reflect the legal distinction between local governments
that are political subdivisions of the States and tribal governments.
Accordingly, these amendments would remove tribal governments from
the definition of ``local governments'' as currently set forth in the
Act, and insert tribal governments in the appropriate and relevant
sections of the Act.
There can be no doubt that tribal governments have a critical role to
play in our Nation's homeland security efforts and the protection of
our land and water borders. Thus, this measure also makes clear that
for purposes of homeland security, the United States recognizes the
inherent authority of tribal governments to exercise jurisdiction
currently with the Federal government to assure that applicable
criminal, civil and regulatory laws are enforced on tribal lands.
______
By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Lott, Mr.
Rockefeller, and Mrs. Hutchison).
S. 579. A bill to reauthorize the National Transportation Safety
Board, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science,
and Transportation.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 579
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``National Transportation
Safety Board Reauthorization Act of 2003''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Fiscal Years 2003-2006.--Section 1118(a) of title 49,
United States Code, is amended--
(1) by striking ``and''; and
(2) by striking ``such sums to'' and inserting the
following: ``$73,325,000 for fiscal year 2003, $78,757,000
for fiscal year 2004, $83,011,000 for fiscal year 2005, and
$87,539,000 for fiscal year 2006. Such sums shall''.
(b) Emergency Fund.--Section 1118(b) of such title is
amended by striking the second sentence and inserting the
following: ``In addition, there are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary to increase the
fund to, and maintain the fund at, a level not to exceed
$3,000,000.''.
(c) NTSB Academy.--Section 1118 of such title is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(c) Academy.--
``(1) Authorization.--There are authorized to be
appropriated to the Board for necessary expenses of the
National Transportation
[[Page S3373]]
Safety Board Academy, not otherwise provided for, $3,347,000
for fiscal year 2003, $4,896,000 for fiscal year 2004,
$4,995,000 for fiscal year 2005, and $5,200,000 for fiscal
year 2006. Such sums shall remain available until expended.
``(2) Fees.--The Board may impose and collect such fees as
it determines to be appropriate for services provided by or
through the Academy.
``(3) Receipts credited as offsetting collections.--
Notwithstanding section 3302 of title 31, any fee collected
under this paragraph--
``(A) shall be credited as offsetting collections to the
account that finances the activities and services for which
the fee is imposed;
``(B) shall be available for expenditure only to pay the
costs of activities and services for which the fee is
imposed; and
``(C) shall remain available until expended.
``(4) Refunds.--The Board may refund any fee paid by
mistake or any amount paid in excess of that required.''.
(c) Report on Academy Operations.--The National
Transportation Safety Board shall transmit an annual report
to the Congress on the activities and operations of the
National Transportation Safety Board Academy.
SEC. 3. ASSISTANCE TO FAMILIES OF PASSENGERS INVOLVED IN
AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS.
(a) Relinquishment of Investigative Priority.--Section 1136
of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(j) Relinquishment of Investigative Priority.--
``(1) General rule.--This section (other than subsection
(g)) shall not apply to an aircraft accident if the Board has
relinquished investigative priority under section
1131(a)(2)(B) and the Federal agency to which the Board
relinquished investigative priority is willing and able to
provide assistance to the victims and families of the
passengers involved in the accident.
``(2) Board assistance.--If this section does not apply to
an aircraft accident because the Board has relinquished
investigative priority with respect to the accident, the
Board shall assist, to the maximum extent possible, the
agency to which the Board has relinquished investigative
priority in assisting families with respect to the
accident.''.
(b) Revision of MOU.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, the National Transportation Safety
Board and the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall revise
their 1977 agreement on the investigation of accidents to
take into account the amendments made by this section and
shall submit a copy of the revised agreement to the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate.
SEC. 4. RELIEF FROM CONTRACTING REQUIREMENTS FOR
INVESTIGATIONS SERVICES.
Section 1113(b) of title 49, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking ``Statutes;'' in paragraph (1)(B) and
inserting ``Statutes, and, for investigations conducted under
section 1131, enter into such agreements or contracts without
regard to any other provision of law requiring competition if
necessary to expedite the investigation;''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) The Board, as a component of its annual report under
section 1117, shall include an enumeration of each contract
for $25,000 or more executed under this section during the
preceding calendar year.''.
____________________