[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 132 (Wednesday, September 24, 2003)]
[House]
[Pages H8815-H8819]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXTENDING TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY FAMILIES BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3146) to extend the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
block grant program, and certain tax and trade programs, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
[[Page H8816]]
H.R. 3146
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
TITLE I--FAMILY ASSISTANCE PROVISIONS
SEC. 101. EXTENSION OF THE TEMPORARY ASSISTANCE FOR NEEDY
FAMILIES BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THROUGH MARCH 31,
2004.
(a) In General.--Activities authorized by part A of title
IV of the Social Security Act, and by sections 510, 1108(b),
and 1925 of such Act, shall continue through March 31, 2004,
in the manner authorized for fiscal year 2002,
notwithstanding section 1902(e)(1)(A) of such Act, and out of
any money in the Treasury of the United States not otherwise
appropriated, there are hereby appropriated such sums as may
be necessary for such purpose. Grants and payments may be
made pursuant to this authority for carrying out such
activities during the first two quarters of fiscal year 2004
at the level provided for the first two quarters of fiscal
year 2002.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Supplemental grants for population increases in certain
states.--Section 403(a)(3)(H) of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 603(a)(3)(H)) is amended--
(A) in the subparagraph heading, by striking ``of grants
for fiscal year 2002''; and
(B) in clause (ii)--
(i) by striking ``2003'' and inserting ``March 31, 2004'';
and
(ii) by striking ``2001'' and inserting ``fiscal year
2001''.
(2) Contingency fund.--Section 403(b)(3)(C)(ii) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 603(b)(3)(C)(ii)) is amended by striking ``2003''
and inserting ``2004''.
(3) Maintenance of effort.--Section 409(a)(7) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 609(a)(7)) is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or 2004'' and
inserting ``2004, or 2005''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B)(ii), by striking ``2003'' and
inserting ``2004''.
SEC. 102. EXTENSION OF THE NATIONAL RANDOM SAMPLE STUDY OF
CHILD WELFARE AND CHILD WELFARE WAIVER
AUTHORITY THROUGH MARCH 31, 2004.
Activities authorized by sections 429A and 1130(a) of the
Social Security Act shall continue through March 31, 2004, in
the manner authorized for fiscal year 2002, and out of any
money in the Treasury of the United States not otherwise
appropriated, there are hereby appropriated such sums as may
be necessary for such purpose. Grants and payments may be
made pursuant to this authority for carrying out such
activities during the first two quarters of fiscal year 2004
at the level provided for the first two quarters of fiscal
year 2002.
TITLE II--TAX PROVISIONS
SEC. 201. DISCLOSURE OF RETURN INFORMATION TO CARRY OUT
INCOME CONTINGENT REPAYMENT OF STUDENT LOANS.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (D) of section 6103(l)(13) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to termination)
is amended by striking ``September 30, 2003'' and inserting
``December 31, 2004''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall apply to requests made after September 30, 2003.
SEC. 202. EXTENSION OF INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE USER FEES.
(a) In General.--Chapter 77 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to miscellaneous provisions) is amended by
adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 7528. INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE USER FEES.
``(a) General Rule.--The Secretary shall establish a
program requiring the payment of user fees for--
``(1) requests to the Internal Revenue Service for ruling
letters, opinion letters, and determination letters, and
``(2) other similar requests.
``(b) Program Criteria.--
``(1) In general.--The fees charged under the program
required by subsection (a)--
``(A) shall vary according to categories (or subcategories)
established by the Secretary,
``(B) shall be determined after taking into account the
average time for (and difficulty of) complying with requests
in each category (and subcategory), and
``(C) shall be payable in advance.
``(2) Exemptions, etc.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall provide for such
exemptions (and reduced fees) under such program as the
Secretary determines to be appropriate.
``(B) Exemption for certain requests regarding pension
plans.--The Secretary shall not require payment of user fees
under such program for requests for determination letters
with respect to the qualified status of a pension benefit
plan maintained solely by 1 or more eligible employers or any
trust which is part of the plan. The preceding sentence shall
not apply to any request--
``(i) made after the later of--
``(I) the fifth plan year the pension benefit plan is in
existence, or
``(II) the end of any remedial amendment period with
respect to the plan beginning within the first 5 plan years,
or
``(ii) made by the sponsor of any prototype or similar plan
which the sponsor intends to market to participating
employers.
``(C) Definitions and special rules.--For purposes of
subparagraph (B)--
``(i) Pension benefit plan.--The term `pension benefit
plan' means a pension, profit-sharing, stock bonus, annuity,
or employee stock ownership plan.
``(ii) Eligible employer.--The term `eligible employer'
means an eligible employer (as defined in section
408(p)(2)(C)(i)(I)) which has at least 1 employee who is not
a highly compensated employee (as defined in section 414(q))
and is participating in the plan. The determination of
whether an employer is an eligible employer under
subparagraph (B) shall be made as of the date of the request
described in such subparagraph.
``(iii) Determination of average fees charged.--For
purposes of any determination of average fees charged, any
request to which subparagraph (B) applies shall not be taken
into account.
``(3) Average fee requirement.--The average fee charged
under the program required by subsection (a) shall not be
less than the amount determined under the following table:
Average
``Category Fee
Employee plan ruling and opinion............................$250 ....
Exempt organization ruling..................................$350 ....
Employee plan determination.................................$300 ....
Exempt organization determination...........................$275 ....
Chief counsel ruling........................................$200.....
``(c) Termination.--No fee shall be imposed under this
section with respect to requests made after December 31,
2004.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) The table of sections for chapter 77 of such Code is
amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``Sec. 7528. Internal Revenue Service user fees.''.
(2) Section 10511 of the Revenue Act of 1987 is repealed.
(3) Section 620 of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001 is repealed.
(c) Limitations.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, any fees collected pursuant to section 7528 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by subsection (a),
shall not be expended by the Internal Revenue Service unless
provided by an appropriations Act.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to requests made after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
TITLE III--TRADE PROVISIONS
SEC. 301. EXTENSION OF COBRA FEES.
Section 13031(j)(3) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(j)(3)) is amended
by striking ``September 30, 2003'' and inserting ``March 31,
2004''.
TITLE IV--MEDICARE COST-SHARING PROVISIONS
SEC. 401. EXTENSION OF MEDICARE COST-SHARING FOR CERTAIN
QUALIFYING INDIVIDUALS.
(a) Extension of Sunset.--Section 1902(a)(10)(E)(iv) of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(10)(E)(iv)) is
amended--
(1) by striking subclause (II);
(2) beginning in the matter preceding subclause (I), by
striking ``ending with December 2002'' and all that follows
through ``for medicare cost-sharing described'' in subclause
(I) and inserting ``ending with March 2004) for medicare
cost-sharing described''; and
(3) by striking ``, and'' at the end and inserting a
semicolon.
(b) Total Amount Available for Allocation.--Section 1933(c)
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u-3(c)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(E), by striking ``fiscal year 2002''
and inserting ``each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``the sum of'' and all
that follows through ``1902(a)(10)(E)(iv)(II) in the State;
to'' and inserting ``the total number of individuals
described in section 1902(a)(10)(E)(iv) in the State; to''.
(c) Special Rule for First Quarter of 2004.--Section 1933
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396u-3) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(g) Special Rule.--With respect to the period that begins
on January 1, 2004, and ends on March 31, 2004, a State shall
select qualifying individuals, and provide such individuals
with assistance, in accordance with the provisions of this
section as in effect with respect to calendar year 2003,
except that for such purpose--
``(1) references in the preceding subsections of this
section to `fiscal year' and `calendar year' shall be deemed
to be references to such period; and
``(2) the total allocation amount under subsection (c) for
such period shall be $100,000,000.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
California (Mr. Herger) and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3146, which extends various
government programs beyond the September 30 end of the fiscal year.
Within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means, this
includes certain tax and trade programs, as well as a simple 6-month
extension of key parts of the Nation's welfare system.
The historic 1996 welfare reform law has been an unparalleled
success. Nearly three million children have been
[[Page H8817]]
lifted from poverty. Record shares of current and former welfare
recipients are working, and welfare dependence has been cut in half.
Despite the challenges facing our country, these welfare reforms
continue to benefit families with children by promoting work by low-
income parents. Unless we act, the authorization for key welfare
programs will expire on September 30, 2003. H.R. 3146 will continue
current funding for these programs through March 31, 2004.
Earlier this month, a bill to reauthorize and improve our Nation's
welfare program was reported out of committee in the Senate. This
extension will provide the Senate more time to consider this bill and
pass a broad welfare reauthorization bill.
Members will recall that the House passed a broad 5-year welfare
reauthorization bill in 2002. This bill was a product of intensive
research and evaluation, including more than 20 hearings in the House.
Key provisions focused on achieving more work, less poverty, and
stronger families. However, the Senate did not act on that bill before
the 107th Congress adjourned.
In February 2003, the House again acted on a full 5-year welfare
reform reauthorization bill and approved H.R. 4, an updated version of
its 2002 bill. We continue to wait for a consensus on a long-term
reauthorization of our Nation's welfare programs. In the meantime, we
continue to see evidence that welfare reform continues to work.
A report released in August presented key indicators of well-being
for America's children that once again show positive results for our
children. Birth rates for unmarried teenagers have dropped considerably
since 1994. The poverty rate for children raised by single moms also
has declined markedly.
However, there is still more progress to be made. Today, fewer
children live in married-couple families. We have seen a steadily
growing stream of evidence that children do best when raised by
married-couple families. That is why the House-passed welfare reform
bill provides flexibility to States to promote marriage and strong
families. States and families would be on the receiving end if we reach
agreement on a long-term reauthorization bill.
Unfortunately, the improvements included in H.R. 4 will continue to
remain on hold while we pass short-term placeholder extensions.
In addition to funds to promote strong families, H.R. 4, as passed by
the House, also provides at least $2 billion in added child care funds
over 5 years, along with more flexibility in spending cash welfare
funds on child care and other needs.
So long as we continue to extend our Nation's welfare system on a
short-term basis, States cannot take advantage of these additional
dollars or improved flexibility. The means low-income families will not
see the benefits of the improvements we have proposed for the program.
Ultimately, the success of the 1996 law reforms may begin to erode as
well. Recognizing the importance of continuing these programs, the
House and Senate have agreed to four short-term extensions of our
Nation's welfare programs. However, I hope that in the next 6 months we
get a comprehensive welfare reform bill to the President's desk for
signature.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise also in support of the legislation and urge my
colleagues to support it. I agree with the gentleman from California
(Mr. Herger), the chairman of the subcommittee, regarding the need to
enact this legislation. However, I want to make it clear I disagree
with my subcommittee chairman on many of the statements made as to the
reason why we are at this point, why we need to enact a temporary
extension of our TANF law rather than a permanent extension.
This bill is important because it allows our States to know that for
the next 6 months they will have uninterrupted Federal funds to
continue their work on dealing with the people who are the most
vulnerable, that we are trying to get off of cash assistance, into real
jobs.
However, we have made that task more difficult because we cannot pass
a long-term reauthorization, and we cannot pass a long-term
reauthorization because this body, in passing its bill, did not do what
our chairman asked us to do, and that is to reach a consensus to try to
work together as Democrats and Republicans to build upon the success of
1996. Instead, we had a very partisan bill that passed this body and
that has made it very difficult to reconcile with the other body.
We passed a bill that was opposed by our Governors, by our mayors, by
State welfare administrators, by poverty experts and advocates for low-
income families; and the reason, quite frankly, is because it did not
reauthorize TANF and take us to the next level, which would be to get
families not just off of cash assistance but out of poverty. Instead,
the bill that passed this body created what is known as ``make-work''
opportunities rather than real jobs. It provided mandates on our States
without providing the funds to deal with it. It made it more difficult
for people who are the most in need of training and education to get
the training and education they need in order to succeed in the
workforce. It discriminated, and continues the discrimination, against
legal immigrants.
For all these reasons, the bill that passed this body made it more
difficult for us to reconcile differences with the other body and to
enact reauthorization of TANF that we all could be very proud of.
Mr. Speaker, I hope we use this opportunity, the next 6 months, to
sit down together and listen to each other, listen to our mutual
objectives as to what we are trying to achieve in welfare
reauthorization, so that we can pass a bill that we will be proud of
that will take us to the next plateau and allow us to move families out
of poverty and not just off of cash assistance.
I might point out that this legislation extends the traditional
Medicaid that continues families with health insurance after they have
left the welfare rolls. That is a very important program. It also
extends the IRS user fees for certain advanced rulings and allows the
IRS to continue to share information with the Department of Education
to administer the student loan programs; custom user fees will be
extended for 6 months; Medicare premiums for low-income seniors, that
program that pays those premiums would be extended. There is a lot in
this bill that we have to make sure is accomplished before the
expiration at the end of this fiscal year, and I encourage my
colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. English), a member of the Committee on Ways and
Means.
Mr. ENGLISH. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this
time and for all of his efforts on behalf of those who are in the
welfare system, and I also thank the gentleman occupying the chair, the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), for his long and successful
efforts to reform the welfare system.
Mr. Speaker, since we first overhauled this country's failed welfare
system back in 1996, some three million children have risen out of
poverty. Today I rise to support this legislation as an important
transition to the full reauthorization of those important reforms.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the number of
American children experiencing hunger has plummeted to half its number
of what it was in 1995. When States and local governments shifted their
focus from writing checks to encouraging work, welfare case loads fell
by 60 percent, as we predicted. As a result, 3.5 million fewer
Americans live their lives in poverty than was the case back in 1995
when this process started. However, some 2 million recipients remain
dependent on welfare assistance, and many still do not participate in
work or in training programs.
{time} 1500
While the success of past welfare reform initiatives are inspiring,
and give lie to some of the claims we heard when we went through this
process made by the other side, it is obvious that more work still
needs to be done.
The House has passed the right kind of reauthorization of welfare
reform boosted by tougher work requirements and reinvigorated work
incentives for
[[Page H8818]]
States and welfare recipients. Full check sanction, marriage promotion,
and other enhancements will only make welfare reform more effective.
We realize that some have come to oppose this legislation, some that
had been listed on the other side of the aisle. But, in our view, we
are going to stand fast to see this reform through.
Some opponents of welfare reform clearly are trying to run out the
clock on this reauthorization so they can turn back the clock to the
days of dependence. We will resist their efforts. These opponents of
effective social policy have essentially filibustered our efforts to
fight poverty and support economic independence for America's poor.
I am, Mr. Speaker, very encouraged by the Senate Committee on
Finance's recent approval of TANF reauthorization, and I now implore
the Senate to work toward final passage of this crucial legislation.
We have an opportunity to write a final chapter on welfare reform,
the most successful social reform of the latter part of the 20th
century. And much of the credit I want to give today goes to the
gentleman sitting in the Chair, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw).
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Levin), the person who is the author of provisions that
would enforce a real work requirement on our States by rewarding those
States who find real jobs for people who leave cash assistance.
(Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Maryland (Mr.
Cardin) for all of his work.
Like the gentleman from Maryland, I favor this extension. The good
news is that it is not a step backward. We are going to continue State
flexibility, we are going to continue the focus on work. We are going
to continue provisions for child care and health care and
transportation, but I want to take this opportunity, as Mr. Cardin did,
to put this into perspective. I am glad the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. English) is still here.
We worked hard in 1995 and 1996 on welfare reform. It was not a
partisan effort. It was an effort with a Democratic President and with
substantial work from Democrats in the House and in the Senate.
Significant changes were made from the bill originally vetoed by
President Clinton. Adequate child care, adequate health care, those
were placed into the bill before it became a law.
This time around what the Republican majority in the House decided to
do was to proceed, as Mr. Cardin has said, on a very partisan basis.
There was no effort to sit down as was true in 1995 and 1996,
eventually, to see if we could work out together Welfare Reform II.
So, on a very partisan vote, the first vote was 229 to 197, the bill
was passed and was sent to the Senate. Sad it is to say that since that
time, and it has been a year and a half ago, there has been zero effort
by the majority in this House to sit down with a number of us who were
involved in 1995 and 1996 and those who have been active since and try
to work out a bill on a bipartisan basis.
We have urged that welfare reform be continued and really improved,
improved by more adequate child care, improved by more adequate health
care. The data is pretty clear that many people who are moving from
welfare to work are losing their health care after a year. Welfare
reform should be improved by maintaining State flexibility and also by
helping those who move from welfare to work to work out of poverty and
to work into a decent and adequate wage.
So why not sit down and talk about these improvements in welfare
reform? Well, the Republican majority here has done on welfare reform
what they have done on most important issues: Ram it through, thumb
their nose at the minority, including those who very much want to work
on an issue, and send it over to the Senate. And like other products
here on a very partisan basis, it runs into trouble in the Senate.
And so what is said by the majority here? Oh, it is the Senate's
fault, when it was really the failure of the Republican majority here
to start welfare reform on a proper, appropriate, and effective track.
Mr. Speaker, the good news is that the extension for 6 months will
keep the better part of the welfare reform programs: health care, day
care, State flexibility, and the focus on work. The bad news is that we
have lost the opportunity to improve, to build on welfare reform, to
have a sharper focus on movement of those who leave work out of
poverty. Instead, the focus in their bill is really those who stay on
welfare being kept busy.
That is not the wise focus for welfare reform in 2003 as it was not
in 2002, and I hope 2004 will see their reaching out a hand to talk
these things over. If not, I am afraid we will be back here with
another extension, and you will point to the Senate controlled by the
same party as you are a Member of and will blast the Senate. But that
is not very constructive. It is not very useful.
So do not talk about all the hearings you have held, all the
witnesses you have heard. Talk about how many minutes you have spent
sitting down with the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin), who is our
ranking member, and the rest of us on the subcommittee to see if we
could work out a bill. Tell us how many minutes. The answer is zero.
I say this not really to castigate, but to urge that you give the
process a chance. Welfare reform deserves an effort to build a
bipartisan and better product. I deeply believe that. So I urge that we
vote for this extension, and I also urge that the extension be followed
by a true effort at finding a good product for the next phase of
welfare reform.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me just say in closing, with what the gentleman from Michigan
(Mr. Levin) said, I concur. I urge my colleagues to support this
legislation. Let me just underscore the point, though, in 1996 we got
it right. We got it right because we listened to each other, and we
listened to the needs, and we realized by doing that we could transform
the old welfare system into a system that encourages people to get off
of cash assistance and to be employed.
The bill that passed this body is a step backwards. My friend from
Pennsylvania said we will not take a step backwards. The legislation
that passed that body did that. It was one size fits all. In 1996 we
said we would trust local governments, our States, to craft the
programs necessary to meet their constituency. Now we are going back,
according what passed this body, to one size fits all from Washington.
That is inconsistent with what we did in 1996, which was the right way
to go.
Secondly, we said in 1996, let people who are on welfare, on cash
assistance, get the education and job training they need in order to
get permanent employment. The legislation that passed this body takes a
step backwards on that, restricting the ability of the States to allow
welfare recipients to get the necessary education and training that
they need. In 1996 we said they cannot do this unless they provide
child care to the States so they could provide help to take care of the
children. That is what we said in 1996. And yet in the bill that passed
this body, we did not recognize that. Instead, we put unfunded mandates
on the States and did not provide the necessary resources for child
care. So I would hope that we will use the next 6 months to correct
this.
Let me just say in the backdrop, as we are debating this today, the
poverty rates in this Nation are actually increasing among children.
Our States, almost all have cut their child care money because of their
budget problems. The needs for us to act now is greater than it was a
year ago when we originally passed the bill in this body. So I would
hope that we would look at the current situation. Our States are
spending more of their TANF funds every year than they are receiving in
the annual authorization. The needs are there.
Yes, let us step up to the plate like we did in 1996. Let us work
together in a bipartisan way. Let us be committed to get families not
just off of cash assistance, but out of poverty, and if we will sit
down and talk together, I am sure in the next 6 months we can come up
with a bill we all can be proud of that will be supported by our
States. If not, I am afraid the gentleman from Michigan's (Mr. Levin)
prediction will
[[Page H8819]]
come true, and we will be again looking at another short-term fix.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
This is indeed a very important piece of legislation which keeps
welfare programs that promote work and independence operating from
coast to coast. It is important that those programs continue to be
funded beyond their current September 30 expiration date. It is
unfortunate that we have not yet reached a deal on a full 5-year
welfare reform reauthorization bill that promises many improvements to
the welfare reform policies now in place. The House welfare bill
includes an additional $2 billion for child care so that more parents
can work and more flexibility for States to spend their welfare funds,
but until we get agreement on such a broader bill, we need to keep
today's program operating. That is what this bill does.
I urge all Members to support this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shaw). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3146, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________