[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 64 (Friday, April 20, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4811-S4815]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Leahy, and Mr. 
        Schumer):
  S. 1176. A bill to require enhanced disclosure to consumers regarding 
the consequences of making only minimum required payments in the 
repayment of credit card debt, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Credit Card 
Minimum Payment Warning Act. I thank Senators Durbin, Leahy, and 
Schumer for cosponsoring this legislation.
  Too many consumers in our country are burdened by significant credit 
card debt. Revolving debt, mostly comprised of credit card debt, has 
risen from $54 billion in 1980 to more than $883 billion in 2007.
  We must make consumers more aware of the long-term effects of their 
financial decisions, particularly in managing credit card debt. While 
it is relatively easy to obtain credit, especially on college campuses, 
not enough is being done to ensure that credit is properly managed. 
Currently, credit card statements fail to include vital information 
that would allow individuals to make fully informed financial 
decisions. Additional disclosure is needed to ensure that consumers 
completely understand the implications of their credit card use and the 
costs of only making the minimum payments.
  The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 
included a requirement that credit card issuers provide information to 
consumers about the consequences of only making the minimum monthly 
payment. However, this requirement fails to provide the detailed 
information on billing statements that consumers need to know to make 
informed decisions. The bankruptcy law allows credit card issuers a 
choice between disclosure statements. The first option included in the 
bankruptcy bill would require a standard ``Minimum Payment Warning.'' 
The generic warning would state that it would take 88 months to pay off 
a balance of $1,000 for bank card holders or 24 months to pay off a 
balance of $300 for retail card holders. This first option also 
includes a requirement that a toll-free number be established that 
would provide an estimate of the time it would take to pay off the 
customer's balance. The Federal Reserve Board is required to establish 
the table that would estimate the approximate number of months it would 
take to pay off a variety of account balances.
  There is a second option that the law permits. The second option 
allows the credit card issuer to provide a general minimum payment 
warning and provide a toll-free number that consumers could call for 
the actual number of months to repay the outstanding balance.
  The options available under the Bankruptcy Reform law are woefully 
inadequate. They do not require issuers to provide their customers with 
the total amount they would pay in interest and principal if they chose 
to pay off their balance at the minimum rate. Since the average 
household with debt carries a balance of approximately $10,000 to 
$12,000 in revolving debt, a warning based on a balance of $1,000 will 
not be helpful. The minimum payment warning included in the first 
option underestimates the costs of paying a balance off at the minimum 
payment. If a family has a credit card debt of $10,000, and the 
interest rate is a modest 12.4 percent, it would take more than ten and 
a half years to pay off the balance while making minimum monthly 
payments of four percent.
  My legislation would make it very clear what costs consumers will 
incur if they make only the minimum payments on their credit cards. If 
the Credit Card Minimum Payment Warning Act is enacted, the 
personalized information consumers would receive for their accounts 
would help them make informed choices about their payments toward 
reducing outstanding debt.
  My bill requires a minimum payment warning notification on monthly 
statements stating that making the minimum payment will increase the 
amount of interest that will be paid and extend the amount of time it 
will take to repay the outstanding balance. The legislation also 
requires companies to inform consumers of how many years and months it 
will take to repay their entire balance if they make only minimum 
payments. In addition, the total cost in interest and principal, if the 
consumer pays only the minimum payment, would have to be disclosed. 
These provisions will make individuals much more aware of the true 
costs of their credit card debt. The bill also requires that credit 
card companies provide useful information so that people can develop 
strategies to free themselves of credit card debt. Consumers would have 
to be provided with the amount they need to pay to eliminate their 
outstanding balance within 36 months.
  Finally, the legislation requires that creditors establish a toll-
free number so that consumers can access trustworthy credit counselors. 
In order to ensure that consumers are referred only to trustworthy 
credit counseling organizations, these agencies would have to be 
approved by the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Reserve Board 
as having met comprehensive quality standards. These standards are 
necessary because certain credit counseling agencies have abused their 
nonprofit, tax-exempt status and taken advantage of people seeking 
assistance in managing their debt.
  In a report on customized minimum payment disclosures released in 
April 2006, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that 
consumers who typically carry credit balances found customized 
disclosures very useful and would prefer to receive them in their 
billing statements.
  We must provide consumers with detailed personalized information to 
assist them in making better informed choices about their credit card 
use and repayment. Our bill makes clear the adverse consequences of 
uninformed choices, such as making only minimum payments, and provides 
opportunities to locate assistance to better manage credit card debt.
  My bill is necessary to improve credit card disclosures so that 
consumers are provided relevant and useful information that hopefully 
will bring about positive behavior change among consumers. Consumers 
with lower debt levels will be better able to purchase a home, pay for 
their child's education, or retire comfortably on their own terms.
  I will ask that a letter of support from the Consumer Federation of 
America, the Center for Responsible Lending, Consumer Action, Consumers 
Union, Demos, the National Association of Consumer Advocates, U.S. 
Public Interest Research Group, the National Council of La Raza, and 
the National Consumer Law Center be printed in the Record.
  I will also ask that the text of the Credit Card Minimum Payment 
Warning Act be printed in the Record.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation that will 
empower consumers by providing them with detailed personalized 
information to assist them in making informed choices about their 
credit card use and repayment. This bill makes clear the adverse 
consequences of uninformed choices such as making only minimum payments 
and provides opportunities to locate assistance to reduce credit card 
debt.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the aforementioned 
materials be printed in the Record.

[[Page S4812]]

  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                   April 17, 2007.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, D.C. 20510
       Dear Senator Akaka: The undersigned national consumer and 
     civil rights organizations write to strongly support the 
     Credit Card Minimum Payment Warning Act. The Act would 
     require credit card issuers to disclose more information to 
     consumers about the costs associated with paying their bills 
     at ever-declining minimum payment rates. The Act provides a 
     personalized ``price tag'' so consumers can understand the 
     real costs of credit card debt and avoid financial problems 
     in the future.
       Undisputed evidence links the rise in bankruptcy in recent 
     years to the increase in consumer credit outstanding. These 
     numbers have moved in lockstep for more than 20 years. 
     Revolving credit, for example (most of which is credit card 
     debt) ballooned from $214 billion in January 1990 to $873 
     billion currently. As family debt increases, debt service 
     payments on items such as interest and late fees take an 
     ever-increasing piece of their budget. For some families, 
     this contributes to the collapse of their budget. Bankruptcy 
     becomes the only way out.
       Credit card issuers have exacerbated the financial problems 
     that many families have faced by lowering minimum payment 
     amounts. This decline in the typical minimum payment is a 
     significant reason for the rise in consumer bankruptcies in 
     recent years. A low minimum payment often barely covers 
     interest obligations. It convinces many borrowers that they 
     are financially sound as long as they can meet all of their 
     minimum payment obligations. However, those who cannot afford 
     to make these payments often carry so much debt that 
     bankruptcy is usually the only viable option.
       This bill will provide consumers several crucial pieces of 
     information on their monthly credit card statement: A 
     ``minimum payment warning'' that paying at the minimum rate 
     will increase the amount of interest that is owed and the 
     time it will take to repay the balance; The number of years 
     and months that it will take the consumer to pay off the 
     balance at the minimum rate; The total costs in interest and 
     principal if the consumer pays at the minimum rate; The 
     monthly payment that would be required to pay the balance off 
     in 3 years.
       The bill also requires that credit card companies provide a 
     toll-free number that consumers can call to receive 
     information about credit counseling and debt management 
     assistance. In order to assure that consumers are referred to 
     honest, legitimate non-profit credit counselors, the bill 
     requires the Federal Reserve to screen these agencies to 
     ensure that they meet rigorous quality standards.
       Our groups commend you for offering this very important and 
     long-overdue piece of legislation. It provides the kind of 
     personalized, timely disclosure information that will help 
     debt-choked families make informed decisions and, with the 
     help of additional protections against abusive credit card 
     lending, start to work their way back to financial health.
       For more information, please contact Travis Plunkett at the 
     Consumer Federation of America at 202-387-6121.
           Sincerely,
         Travis B. Plunkett, Legislative Director, Consumer 
           Federation of America; Gail Hillebrand, Senior 
           Attorney, Consumers Union; Cindy Zeldin, Federal 
           Affairs Coordinator, Economic Opportunity Program, 
           Demos: A Network for Ideas & Action; Kim Warden, Vice 
           President, Federal Affairs, Center for Responsible 
           Lending; Alys Cohen, Staff Attorney, National Consumer 
           Law Center; Edmund Mierzwinski, Consumer Programs 
           Director, U.S. Public Interest Research Group; Linda 
           Sherry, Director, National Priorities, Consumer Action; 
           Ira Rheingold, Executive Director, National Association 
           of Consumer Advocates; Beatriz Ibarra, Assets Policy 
           Analyst, National Council of La Raza.
                                  ____


                                S. 1176

       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 ``Credit Card Minimum Payment 
     Warning Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. ENHANCED CONSUMER DISCLOSURES REGARDING MINIMUM 
                   PAYMENTS.

       Section 127(b) of the Truth in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 
     1637(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11)(A) Information regarding repayment of the 
     outstanding balance of the consumer under the account, 
     appearing in conspicuous type on the front of the first page 
     of each such billing statement, and accompanied by an 
     appropriate explanation, containing--
       ``(i) the words `Minimum Payment Warning: Making only the 
     minimum payment will increase the amount of interest that you 
     pay and the time it will take to repay your outstanding 
     balance.';
       ``(ii) the number of years and months (rounded to the 
     nearest month) that it would take for the consumer to pay the 
     entire amount of that balance, if the consumer pays only the 
     required minimum monthly payments;
       ``(iii) the total cost to the consumer, shown as the sum of 
     all principal and interest payments, and a breakdown of the 
     total costs in interest and principal, of paying that balance 
     in full if the consumer pays only the required minimum 
     monthly payments, and if no further advances are made;
       ``(iv) the monthly payment amount that would be required 
     for the consumer to eliminate the outstanding balance in 36 
     months if no further advances are made; and
       ``(v) a toll-free telephone number at which the consumer 
     may receive information about accessing credit counseling and 
     debt management services.
       ``(B)(i) Subject to clause (ii), in making the disclosures 
     under subparagraph (A) the creditor shall apply the interest 
     rate in effect on the date on which the disclosure is made.
       ``(ii) If the interest rate in effect on the date on which 
     the disclosure is made is a temporary rate that will change 
     under a contractual provision specifying a subsequent 
     interest rate or applying an index or formula for subsequent 
     interest rate adjustment, the creditor shall apply the 
     interest rate in effect on the date on which the disclosure 
     is made for as long as that interest rate will apply under 
     that contractual provision, and then shall apply the adjusted 
     interest rate, as specified in the contract. If the contract 
     applies a formula that uses an index that varies over time, 
     the value of such index on the date on which the disclosure 
     is made shall be used in the application of the formula.''.

     SEC. 3. ACCESS TO CREDIT COUNSELING AND DEBT MANAGEMENT 
                   INFORMATION.

       (a) Guidelines Required.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Board of Governors of the Federal 
     Reserve System and the Federal Trade Commission (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Board'' and the ``Commission'', 
     respectively) shall jointly, by rule, regulation, or order, 
     issue guidelines for the establishment and maintenance by 
     creditors of a toll-free telephone number for purposes of the 
     disclosures required under section 127(b)(11) of the Truth in 
     Lending Act, as added by this Act.
       (2) Approved agencies.--Guidelines issued under this 
     subsection shall ensure that referrals provided by the toll-
     free number include only those agencies approved by the Board 
     and the Commission as meeting the criteria under this 
     section.
       (b) Criteria.--The Board and the Commission shall only 
     approve a nonprofit budget and credit counseling agency for 
     purposes of this section that--
       (1) demonstrates that it will provide qualified counselors, 
     maintain adequate provision for safekeeping and payment of 
     client funds, provide adequate counseling with respect to 
     client credit problems, and deal responsibly and effectively 
     with other matters relating to the quality, effectiveness, 
     and financial security of the services it provides;
       (2) at a minimum--
       (A) is registered as a nonprofit entity under section 
     501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
       (B) has a board of directors, the majority of the members 
     of which--
       (i) are not employed by such agency; and
       (ii) will not directly or indirectly benefit financially 
     from the outcome of the counseling services provided by such 
     agency;
       (C) if a fee is charged for counseling services, charges a 
     reasonable and fair fee, and provides services without regard 
     to ability to pay the fee;
       (D) provides for safekeeping and payment of client funds, 
     including an annual audit of the trust accounts and 
     appropriate employee bonding;
       (E) provides full disclosures to clients, including funding 
     sources, counselor qualifications, possible impact on credit 
     reports, any costs of such program that will be paid by the 
     client, and how such costs will be paid;
       (F) provides adequate counseling with respect to the credit 
     problems of the client, including an analysis of the current 
     financial condition of the client, factors that caused such 
     financial condition, and how such client can develop a plan 
     to respond to the problems without incurring negative 
     amortization of debt;
       (G) provides trained counselors who--
       (i) receive no commissions or bonuses based on the outcome 
     of the counseling services provided;
       (ii) have adequate experience; and
       (iii) have been adequately trained to provide counseling 
     services to individuals in financial difficulty, including 
     the matters described in subparagraph (F);
       (H) demonstrates adequate experience and background in 
     providing credit counseling;
       (I) has adequate financial resources to provide continuing 
     support services for budgeting plans over the life of any 
     repayment plan; and
       (J) is accredited by an independent, nationally recognized 
     accrediting organization.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INOUYE (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Pryor, and Mr. 
        Smith):
  S. 1178. A bill to strengthen data protection and safeguards, require 
data breach notification, and further prevent identity theft; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Identity 
Theft

[[Page S4813]]

Prevention Act of 2007 with my colleagues Senator Stevens and Senator 
Pryor to protect Americans from identity theft.
  The recent breaches of security that led to the loss of sensitive 
personal information remind all of us how vulnerable we are to thieves 
stealing our identity for criminal purposes. Identity theft is a 
growing threat to our personal security that must be met with new 
tactics and new laws in the information age.
  We in the Congress and every consumer in America have seen the 
evolution of identity theft. The moment of greatest awareness was in 
February 2005 when ChoicePoint notified more than 145,000 people that 
their personal data had been accessed by unauthorized persons who used 
some of the information for identity theft. ChoicePoint was required to 
make these contacts under the California notification law, but this 
incident had nationwide effects. Since then, a number of data brokers, 
banks, universities and other entities that hold personal information 
have notified individuals that their personal information may have been 
compromised. The last major breach was made public in January 2007, 
when T.J. Maxx announced it had discovered a breach in the security of 
its customer payment data. As a result of hacker activity starting in 
2005, information on more than 45 million credit and debit cards had 
been stolen.
  The need to address this problem is long overdue. Every business that 
collects and stores sensitive personal information must ensure that the 
information is safeguarded. If a security breach occurs and the 
information could be used for identity theft, every affected consumer 
needs to be notified as soon as possible so they can best protect 
themselves and their families. The Identity Theft Prevention Act 
provides the Federal Trade Commission new enforcement tools to ensure 
businesses that hold a consumer's sensitive personal information use 
vigorous safeguards to prevent breaches from happening. The Act also 
requires businesses to appropriately notify consumers if their 
information is improperly released and could lead to identity theft. In 
addition, the Identity Theft Prevention Act provides consumers the 
ability to place a security freeze on their credit reports, so if they 
choose, they can eliminate the worry and the impact of an identity 
thief opening new lines of credit from stolen information.
  Americans have demanded better protection for their sensitive 
personal information, and it is imperative that we respond to these 
demands effectively and expeditiously. I look forward to working with 
the other Members of the Senate to move this legislation forward.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CASEY:
  S. 1179. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 
the financing for Superfund for purposes of cleanup activities with 
respect to those Superfund sites for which removal and remedial action 
is estimated to cost more than $50,000,000, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, this Sunday we will celebrate Earth Day, a 
day when we should reaffirm our commitment to a clean, safe, and 
healthy environment for our children and future generations.
  We have made a considerable amount of progress since Senator Gaylord 
Nelson established the first Earth Day thirty-seven years ago. We 
implemented the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act, both landmark 
bills that have made our beautiful country a cleaner place to live. We 
no longer have rivers so massively polluted they actually catch fire 
and burn. We no longer have unchecked amounts of toxic pollutants being 
pumped into the air we breathe. We should be proud of these 
accomplishments because they show us that we can pass meaningful and 
effective laws to protect the environment and public health without 
sacrificing our economy and economic productivity.
  We still have serious threats to the safety and health of our 
environment. Obviously global climate change tops that list of threats. 
No other single issue has the potential to devastate our future and 
change the entire world so completely. We have an opportunity, if we 
get smart and take serious actions, to stop the cataclysmic changes 
that are just around the corner for this planet. The time to act is 
now. And I mean right now. Every year that we delay enacting a strong 
bill that forces us to make mandatory reductions to our carbon 
emissions the cost goes up. We simply cannot afford to wait. We cannot 
afford the cost of tackling an ever increasing carbon problem in future 
years. And we certainly cannot afford the long-term implications of 
climate change like rising sea levels that will displace large centers 
of population, droughts that will dramatically reduce fresh drinking 
water, and major storms like those that have hit the Gulf Coast and 
Atlantic seaboard over the past few years.
  Climate change is certainly the most pressing environmental issue 
facing us today. But we should not forget about other important issues 
facing our constituents. Reducing mercury and other air pollutants, 
reducing pollution of our rivers and streams, preserving open space and 
stopping urban sprawl, increasing investments in renewable and 
alternative energy sources, establishing higher fuel efficiency 
standards, and reducing the number of unremediated Superfund sites 
continue to be top priorities for me.
  For this reason and in honor of Earth Day, today I am introducing the 
Superfund Equity and Megasite Remediation Act of 2007. This legislation 
reinstates the polluter-pays tax that funds clean up of Superfund 
sites. In addition, my bill ramps up the tax for limited 5-year period 
in order to create a fund to clean up megasites, which cost more than 
$50 million each to remediate.
  I know that Senator Boxer, the Chairman of the Environment and Public 
Works Committee, has been a long-time advocate for reinstating the 
polluter-pays principle in federal hazardous waste cleanup law. I look 
forward to working with her and all of my colleagues on the Environment 
Committee and the Finance Committee to make sure that we have a 
Superfund program that cleans up the polluted sites that blight our 
communities and prevent development and reuse, and does so in a way 
that polluters foot the bill, and not taxpayers. I urge all of my 
colleagues to join me in support of this bill, and do the right thing 
for our local towns on Earth Day.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU:
  S. 1180. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 
the placed-in-service date requirement for low-income housing credit 
buildings in the Gulf Opportunity Zone, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, as the gulf coast recovers from Katrina 
and Rita, rebuilding our housing remains the key to our recovery. I 
have talked about this issue on this floor before. We need housing so 
that our citizens have a place to live while they rebuild our 
businesses, restore our infrastructure, and renew our communities. 
Congress and the President responded by making billions of dollars 
available to us and we are grateful for this assistance.
  I am proud to say that this assistance is working. Every time I go 
home I see signs of improvement. They are often small: a gas station or 
a store reopening on a corner; children playing on a street where no 
one lived only a few months before. I wish I could say that these signs 
are everywhere, but they are not. Some parts of New Orleans are doing 
well, some are not. We knew from the start that recovery would take 
longer in some areas than in others; and we all knew that nothing would 
happen overnight.
  America has never rebuilt a city of 500,000 people before. Our 
experience in Louisiana and in the Gulf has taught us some valuable 
lessons about postcatastrophe rebuilding and recovery. We have learned 
about the shortcomings of government programs at FEMA, the Small 
Business Administration, and other agencies. In responding to Katrina 
they used the systems that worked great for smaller disasters, but were 
woefully inadequate for larger ones. For future megacatastrophes we now 
understand that it may take government programs several months to ramp 
up before they are in a position to distribute assistance.
  One of the key lessons we have learned from this catastrophe has been 
the affect of such massive destruction

[[Page S4814]]

and displacement on the supply and the costs of labor and building 
materials, and the impact these have on how long it takes to rebuild. 
New Orleans, for example, is about half the population it used to be. 
We do not have enough workers in building and contracting to meet the 
huge demand we have for this work. As a result, it may take several 
months to get building started. Developers are also having difficulty 
getting insurance and the infrastructure in many areas is still heavily 
damaged.
  This timing delay means that Congress will have to reexamine the 
policies that we have enacted to help rebuild the Gulf region in order 
to ensure that they are meeting the new kinds of disaster recovery 
challenges Katrina and Rita have posed. The Gulf Opportunity Zone Act 
of 2005 was one of the major pieces of legislation that we passed. The 
GO Zone Act provided important tax incentives to encourage investment 
in businesses and housing in the Gulf.
  To help ensure that we can rebuild our housing, GO Zone Act increased 
the state's allocation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits, LIHTC. These 
credits finance affordable and mixed income housing. Under the GO Zone 
Act, any housing developed with these tax credits must be built and 
operating by December 31, 2008. The statute refers to this as the 
``placed in service'' date. This date is consistent with the normal 
LIHTC program guidelines that require tax credit housing developments 
to be placed in service within 2 years of allocation.
  The Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, LHFA, reports that there was a 
great demand for these GO Zone credits. For the credits allocated in 
2006, the LHFA received 266 applications from developers for more than 
$253 million. But it only funded 102 projects with $56.9 million in tax 
credits.
  For 2007 and 2008, however, the State received far fewer 
applications. The reason for this is because of the placed-in-service 
date. Because of the labor shortage, increased costs, and lack of 
insurance that we are facing in the Gulf, developers are not sure 
whether they can get their projects placed in service by the end of 
2008. Yet there is still a huge need for the housing that these credits 
will fund.
  The placed-in-service date is also raising new concerns. I have heard 
from a number of organizations that already received tax credit 
allocations before 2006 who are concerned that they will not be able to 
get their developments placed in service by the end of 2008. The LHFA 
estimates that 65 percent of the affordable housing units under 
development in New Orleans, roughly 11,050 units, will not make the 
deadline to be available for rent by the end of 2008. In the 
surrounding parishes, home sales prices have literally hit the roof 
meaning working and middle-income families cannot reasonably justify 
living in the area that they still call home, 19 months since the 
storm. Again, the culprit is the shortages and increased costs that I 
mentioned before. Some developers have even told me that they face 
losing credits that had been allocated to them before the storm because 
building has been delayed in the region. Since Katrina, rental prices 
have increased by 39 percent.
  Today, I am introducing legislation that will help to ensure that 
these housing tax credits are available so that we can continue the 
road to recovery. The Workforce Housing for the GO Zone Act of 2007 
will extend the placed-in-service date for the GO Zone Low Income 
Housing Tax Credit by an additional 2 years. This will allow developers 
to make full use of the credits that are available to build affordable 
housing in the Gulf Coast.
  Another critical provision lets GO Zone low-income housing projects 
receive additional federally subsidized loans without losing tax 
credits. The Low Income Housing Tax Credit provisions included in this 
bill further assist our people to return home. These credits are 
competitively awarded to qualified developers and subject to constant 
oversight by the State housing authority to make sure that only quality 
affordable housing is being constructed. The citizens of the gulf coast 
are ready to go back home, and this legislation helps get them there.
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the legislation be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1180

       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 ``Workforce Housing 
     Construction for the GO Zone Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PLACED-IN-SERVICE DATE REQUIREMENT FOR 
                   LOW-INCOME HOUSING CREDIT BUILDINGS IN GULF 
                   OPPORTUNITY ZONE.

       Section 1400N(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``or 2008'' in paragraph (3)(A) and 
     inserting ``2008, 2009, or 2010'',
       (2) by striking ``during such period'' in paragraph 
     (3)(B)(ii) and inserting ``during the period described in 
     subparagraph (A)'', and
       (3) by striking ``or 2008'' in paragraph (4)(A) and 
     inserting ``2008, 2009, or 2010''.

     SEC. 3. PRESERVATION OF PREVIOUS LOW-INCOME HOUSING CREDIT 
                   BUILDINGS IN GULF OPPORTUNITY ZONE.

       (a) In General.--If an owner of a qualified low-income 
     building (as defined in section 42(c)(2) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986) located in the GO Zone (as defined in 
     section 1400M(1) of such Code) in the second taxable year or 
     later of the credit period (as defined in section 42(f)(1) of 
     such Code) for such building--
       (1) suffers a reduction in the qualified basis (as 
     determined under section 42(b)(1) of such Code) of such 
     building (hereinafter referred to as the ``lost qualified 
     basis'') as a result of a disaster that caused the President 
     to issue a major disaster declaration as a result of 
     Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, but under subsection (j)(4)(E) 
     of section 42 of such Code avoids recapture or loss of low-
     income housing credits previously allowed under such section 
     with respect to such building (hereinafter referred to as the 
     ``existing credits'') by restoring the lost qualified basis 
     by reconstruction, replacement, or rehabilitation within a 
     reasonable period established by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury, and
       (2) obtains an allocation of additional low-income housing 
     credits under such section to fund, in whole or in part, the 
     reconstruction, replacement, or rehabilitation of such 
     building (hereinafter referred to as the ``new credits''),

     then the qualified basis of such building for purposes of 
     determining the new credits shall equal the excess (if any) 
     of such building's qualified basis as of the close of the 
     first taxable year of the credit period (as so defined) with 
     respect to the new credits (assuming such reconstruction, 
     replacement, or rehabilitation expenditures meet the 
     requirements for treatment as a separate new building), over 
     such building's qualified basis with respect to the existing 
     credits as determined immediately prior to the disaster 
     referred to in paragraph (1).
       (b) Special Rule for Time for Making Allocations of 
     Credits.--For purposes of section 42(h)(1)(E)(ii) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986, buildings described in 
     subsection (a) shall be deemed to be qualified buildings.
       (c) Avoidance of Recapture of Credit.--For purposes of 
     section 42(j)(4)(E) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 
     qualified low-income housing projects (as defined in section 
     42(g)(1) of such Code) suffering casualty as a result of a 
     disaster that caused the President to issue a major disaster 
     declaration for the Go Zone (as defined in section 
     1400M(1))shall be deemed to have restored any casualty loss 
     by reconstruction or replacement within a reasonable period 
     if such loss is restored before January 1, 2011.

     SEC. 4. CREDIT ALLOWABLE FOR CERTAIN BUILDINGS ACQUIRED 
                   DURING 10-YEAR PERIOD IN THE KATRINA, RITA, AND 
                   WILMA DISASTER AREAS.

       Section 1400N(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6) and 
     by inserting after paragraph (4) the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Credit allowable for buildings acquired during 10-
     year period.--A waiver may be granted under section 
     42(d)(6)(A) (without regard to any clause thereof) with 
     respect to any building in the Gulf Opportunity Zone, the 
     Rita GO Zone, or the Wilma GO Zone.''.

     SEC. 5. INCLUSION OF BASIS OF PROPERTY FOR MIXED INCOME 
                   HOUSING IN KATRINA, RITA, AND WILMA DISASTER 
                   AREAS.

       Section 1400N(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as 
     amended by this Act, is amended by redesignating paragraph 
     (6) as paragraph (7) and by inserting after paragraph (5) the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Increase in applicable fraction for mixed income 
     projects.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of any qualified low-income 
     housing project under section 42(g) which is located in the 
     Gulf Opportunity Zone, the Rita GO Zone, or the Wilma GO Zone 
     and in which the applicable fraction for any building of such 
     qualified low-income housing project is not less than 20 
     percent and not more than 60 percent but for the provisions 
     of this subparagraph, the numerator of the applicable 
     fraction under section 42(c)(1)(B) shall be increased by--
       ``(i) one or 5 percent of the total number of units 
     (whichever adjustment provides the largest unit fraction) for 
     each building in the qualified low income housing project in 
     the case of the unit fraction under section 42(c)(1)(C), and

[[Page S4815]]

       ``(ii) five percent of the total floor space in the case of 
     the floor space fraction under section 42(c)(1)(D).
       ``(B) Application.--Subparagraph (A) shall apply to--
       ``(i) housing credit dollar amounts allocated after 
     December 31, 2007, and
       ``(ii) buildings placed in service after such date to the 
     extent paragraph (1) of section 42(h) does not apply to any 
     building by reason of paragraph (4) thereof, but only with 
     respect to bonds issued after such date.''.

     SEC. 6. OVER INCOME LOANS FOR KATRINA, RITA, AND WILMA 
                   DISASTER AREAS.

       (a) In General.--Section 1400N(a)(5)(B) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding ``and'' at the end 
     of clause (ii), by striking clause (iii), and by 
     redesignating clause (iv) as clause (iii).
       (b) Mortgage Revenue Bonds.--Section 1400T(a) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding ``and'' at 
     the end of paragraph (1), by striking paragraph (2), and by 
     redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 7. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS NOT TAKEN INTO 
                   ACCOUNT IN DETERMINING IF BUILDINGS ARE 
                   FEDERALLY SUBSIDIZED.

       Section 1400N(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as 
     amended by this Act, is amended by redesignating paragraph 
     (7) as paragraph (8) and by inserting after paragraph (6) the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(7) Community development block grants not taken into 
     account in determining if buildings are federally 
     subsidized.--For purpose of applying section 42(i)(2)(D) to 
     any building which is placed in service in the Gulf 
     Opportunity Zone, the Rita GO Zone, or the Wilma GO Zone 
     during the period beginning on January 1, 2006, and ending on 
     December 31, 2010, a loan shall not be treated as a below 
     market Federal loan solely by reason of any assistance 
     provided under section 106, 107, or 108 of the Housing and 
     Community Development Act of 1974 by reason of section 122 of 
     such Act or any provision of the Department of Defense 
     Appropriations Act, 2006, or the Emergency Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and 
     Hurricane Recovery, 2006.''.

     SEC. 8. APPLICATION OF THE DEFINITIONS AND SPECIAL RULES 
                   UNDER SECTION 42(I) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE 
                   CODE OF 1986 FOR BOND-FINANCED PROJECTS.

       (a) In General.--For purposes of qualifying as a qualified 
     residential rental project under section 142(d)(1) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 [in the Gulf Opportunity Zone, 
     the Rita GO Zone, or the Wilma GO Zone], the special 
     definitions and special rules for low-income units in section 
     42(i)(3) of such Code shall apply.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take apply to bonds 
     issued after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 9. SPECIAL TAX-EXEMPT BOND FINANCING RULE FOR REPAIRS 
                   AND RECONSTRUCTIONS OF RESIDENCES IN THE GO 
                   ZONES.

       Section 1400N(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(7) Special rule for repairs and reconstructions.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of section 143 and this 
     subsection, any qualified GO Zone repair or reconstruction 
     shall be treated as a qualified rehabilitation.
       ``(B) Qualified go zone repair or reconstruction.--For 
     purposes of subparagraph (A), the term `qualified GO Zone 
     repair or reconstruction' means any repair of damage caused 
     by Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Rita, or Hurricane Wilma to a 
     building located in the Gulf Opportunity Zone, the Rita GO 
     Zone, or the Wilma GO Zone (or reconstruction of such 
     building in the case of damage constituting destruction) if 
     the expenditures for such repair or reconstruction are 25 
     percent or more of the mortgagor's adjusted basis in the 
     residence. For purposes of the preceding sentence, the 
     mortgagor's adjusted basis shall be determined as of the 
     completion of the repair or reconstruction or, if later, the 
     date on which the mortgagor acquires the residence.
       ``(C) Termination.--This paragraph shall apply only to 
     owner-financing provided after the date of the enactment of 
     this paragraph and before January 1, 2011.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. 
        Kennedy):
  S. 1182. A bill to amend the Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley 
National Heritage Corridor Act of 1994 to increase the authorization of 
appropriations and modify the date on which the authority of the 
Secretary of the Interior terminates under the Act; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I join with my colleagues, Senators 
Lieberman, Kerry, and Kennedy, to introduce the Quinebaug and Shetucket 
Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor Amendments Act of 2007. 
Representatives Courtney and Neal have introduced a companion bill in 
the House.
  The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor, 
or QSHC, was established in 1994 as the fifth National Heritage 
Corridor. National Heritage Areas are designated by Congress to 
preserve distinctive landscapes of historic, cultural, natural, and 
recreational resources. The QSHC is commonly known as ``The Last Green 
Valley,'' a rare rural landscape in the populous Northeast. In fact, 
the Valley stands out in night images from space for its absence of 
lights. It contains aboriginal and colonial archaeological sites, mills 
and mill villages that preserve the history of the early industrial 
revolution, and traditional farming communities. The QSHC non-profit 
management entity has restored architecturally and historically 
important buildings, developed interpretive projects, and developed 
conservation and open space plans. It has consistently leveraged an 
average of $19 for every $1 of appropriated Federal money.
  The QSHC has developed a plan to become a self-sustaining entity by 
2015, as laid out in ``The Trail to 2015: A Sustainability Plan for the 
Last Green Valley.'' The plan calls for replacing Federal funds with 
fees for services, private and corporate support, and income from a 
permanent fund. In the interim, Federal funds are necessary for 
capacity-building, awareness programs, and ongoing education of land-
use decision-makers.
  The Quinebaug and Shetucket Rivers Valley National Heritage Corridor 
has created a collaboration of 35 municipalities dedicated to 
preserving a unique slice of our American heritage. With an extension 
of its authorization, this preserve can exist in perpetuity. I urge my 
colleagues to support reauthorization of the QSHC.

                          ____________________