[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 90 (Wednesday, June 18, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H5474-H5475]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 1528, TAXPAYER PROTECTION AND IRS 
                       ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2003

  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the 
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 282 and ask for its 
immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                              H. Res. 282

       Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it 
     shall be in order without intervention of any point of order 
     to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 1528) to amend the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to protect taxpayers and ensure 
     accountability of the Internal Revenue Service. The bill 
     shall be considered as read for amendment. The amendment 
     recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means now printed in 
     the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the 
     report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
     resolution, shall be considered as adopted. All points of 
     order against the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous 
     question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as 
     amended, and on any further amendment thereto to final 
     passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
     debate on the bill, as amended, equally divided and 
     controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the 
     Committee on Ways and Means; (2) the further amendment 
     printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules, if 
     offered by Representative Rangel of New York or his designee, 
     which shall be in order without intervention of any point of 
     order, shall be considered as read, and shall be separately 
     debatable for one hour equally divide and controlled by the 
     proponent and an opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit 
     with or without instructions.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ose). The gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Hastings) is recognized for 1 hour.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate 
only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York 
(Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is 
for the purpose of debate only.
  (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to revise 
and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 282 is a 
modified, closed rule waiving all points of order against the 
consideration of H.R. 1528, the Taxpayer Protection and IRS 
Accountability Act of 2003. The rule provides one hour of debate to be 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority 
member of the Committee on Ways and Means. The rule also provides that 
the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on Ways and Means, as modified by the amendment printed in 
Part A of the Committee on Rules report accompanying this resolution, 
shall be considered as adopted. The rule waives all points of order 
against the bill, as amended.
  The rule further provides for consideration of the amendment printed 
in Part B of the report, if offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Rangel) or his designee, which shall be considered as read and shall be 
separately debatable for one hour, equally divided and controlled by a 
proponent and an opponent.
  Finally, the rule waives all points of order against the amendment 
printed in Part B of the report and provides one motion to recommit, 
with or without instructions.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1528, as authored by my friend and colleague, the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman), would amend the Internal Revenue 
Code of 1986 to protect taxpayers and ensure accountability of the IRS. 
The bill would improve the efficiency of tax administration and 
increase the confidentiality of tax returns and related information.

[[Page H5475]]

  In addition, H.R. 1528 reforms the penalty and interest provisions of 
the Internal Revenue Code and provides new safeguards against unfair 
IRS collection procedures.
  Specifically, the bill grants a first-time penalty waiver to 
individual taxpayers in cases where minor negligence results in a 
liability that is disproportionate and unreasonable.

                              {time}  1030

  The bill allows taxpayers to enter into installment agreements for 
less than the full amount of their tax liability.
  The bill also allows electronic filers until April 30 to file their 
individual tax returns and allows taxpayers to consult with the 
Taxpayer Advocate Service on a confidential basis.
  Finally, the bill increases the authorization for low income taxpayer 
clinics from $6 million to $9 million in 2004 and from $12 million for 
2005 and $15 million for subsequent years.
  The Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation 
estimate that H.R. 1528 would decrease governmental receipts by $308 
million over the 2003-2013 time period, and CBO estimates that the bill 
would increase direct spending by $171 million over the 2004-2013 time 
period.
  CBO has determined that H.R. 1528 contains no private sector or 
intergovernmental mandates as defined by the Unfunded Mandate Reform 
Act and would impose no costs on State, local, or tribal governments.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Portman) and his colleagues 
on the Committee on Ways and Means are to be commended for their 
efforts to increase fairness in accountability in our tax collection 
system. Accordingly, I urge my colleagues to support both this rule and 
the underlying bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Ms. SLAUGHTER asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Washington for 
yielding me the customary 30 minutes.
  Mr. Speaker, priorities, what are our priorities? H.R. 1528 is a 
popular, noncontroversial measure that would likely pass under 
suspension of the rules. So why have we made such a bill more 
problematic and more difficult to pass? A controversial provision 
unrelated to restraints on the IRS or protections for American 
taxpayers was grafted onto this consensus legislation for the second 
time. If our priority is to enact additional protections for the 
Federal taxpayer, why was a provision waiving consumer protections for 
the health insurance tax credit, for workers who have been displaced by 
trade, implanted into this unrelated bill?
  The problem that we now face as we consider H. Res. 282 is that the 
taxpayer protection bill eliminates the federally mandated requirements 
of affordability and nondiscrimination for state-based insurance 
policies for the American workers whose jobs were moved overseas. This 
controversial and problematic add-on allows the insurers to pick and 
choose the displaced workers that they wish to cover, insuring the 
young and healthy and refusing to cover the older workers and those 
with preexisting conditions. Such a provision would undo the promises 
Congress last year made to the displaced workers and to their families. 
Is our priority the health of working families, or is it increasing the 
bottom line for certain health plans?
  Fortunately, the rule does make in order the substitute amendment 
offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), my fellow New 
Yorker, the ranking member of the Committee on Ways and Means, which 
better reflects what our priorities should be. This amendment removes 
the waivers that would allow insurance plans to discriminate and 
includes the child tax credit that seems to have been abandoned in the 
bureaucratic forest.
  The Nation was outraged to learn that in the recent tax-cutting 
package almost 12 million children were denied the benefit of the 
increased child tax credit. A way to correct this is simple and 
straightforward. The other body overwhelmingly by a vote of 94 to 2 
passed a clean, simple, bipartisan bill to extend the child tax credit 
to the 7 million low-income working families. However, our priorities 
went in the wrong direction.
  Instead of quickly passing the other body's bill so the President 
could sign it and these low-income working families could receive 
immediate tax credits, which they badly need, the Chamber chose to 
consider and pass another round of tax cuts totaling $82 billion 
without any offsets, following on the heels of the $350 billion worth 
of tax cuts. This indicated that the priority is to use the child tax 
credit legislation as another opportunity to add more and more tax cuts 
for those at the highest levels of wealth.
  The Rangel substitute includes the language in the clean bill passed 
by the other body and contains language to extend the child tax credits 
to the 200,000-or-so families of the military personnel who serve in 
Iraq, Afghanistan or other combat zones and nonetheless are ineligible 
under the House-passed tax free-for-all. Let me repeat that, Mr. 
Speaker: 200,000 families of military personnel who are on active duty 
were denied the protections or the benefits from this bill.
  I urge my colleagues to vote against this rule so that the provisions 
permitting the discrimination can be excised from an otherwise 
noncontroversial bill that would undoubtedly pass unanimously. Should 
H. Res. 282 pass, I strongly urge my colleagues to support the Rangel 
substitute amendment for these children and families who deserve swift 
and deliberate action without political add-ons and political 
chicanery.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I advise my friend from New 
York that I have no requests for time, and I am prepared to yield back 
if she is prepared to yield back.
  Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for time, and I yield 
back my time.
  Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of 
my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.
  The previous question was ordered.
  The resolution was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________