[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 157 (Monday, September 29, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10081-S10082]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               NOTICES OF INTENT TO OBJECT TO PROCEEDING

  Mr. KERRY, pursuant to the provisions of section 512 of Public Law 
110-81, submitted his notice of intent to object to proceed to consider 
the resolution (S. Res. 626), expressing the sense of the Senate that 
the Supreme Court of the United States erroneously decided Kennedy v. 
Louisiana, No. 07-343 (2008), and that the eighth amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States allows the imposition of the death 
penalty for the rape of a child, dated July 25, 2008, for the following 
reasons:
  The Supreme Court has already shown its intention to revisit the 
Kennedy v. Louisiana decision. The Court has petitioned the parties in 
the case, as well as the United States Solicitor General, to submit 
supplemental briefs in response to the standing Petition for Rehearing. 
Due to these pending proceedings I believe the United States Senate 
should not take action at this time as it would be inappropriately 
premature.
  Mr. GRASSLEY, pursuant to the provisions of section 512 of Public Law 
110-81, submitted his notice of intent to object to proceed to consider 
the bill (H.R. 7083) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 
enhance charitable giving and improve disclosure and tax 
administration, dated September 26, 2008, for the following reasons:
  I wrote a series of charitable reforms that became law in the Pension 
Protection Act of 2006. The reforms grew out of my oversight of tax-
exempt organizations and laws, which had not been updated substantially 
since 1969. This legislation would unwind some of the 2006 reforms as 
they apply to certain supporting organizations.
  Private foundations and supporting organizations enjoy tax-exempt 
status on their money. In exchange for that special status, they have 
to comply with a few requirements. One is that they pay out 5 percent 
of their assets each year. This pay-out requirement is meant to make 
sure the organization offers some public benefit in exchange for tax 
exemption and doesn't exist simply to invest its money and pay a staff 
and a board of directors--often family members--in perpetuity. Another 
requirement is that private foundations and certain supporting 
organizations are subject to a tax on excess business holdings. In 
general, the tax applies to substantial interests these

[[Page S10082]]

organizations may hold in corporations and other businesses. The tax is 
designed to make sure tax-exempt organizations don't shelter oil 
refineries and yacht clubs from paying taxes.
  A handful of organizations argue that these requirements are onerous 
or that they should be exempt because they were created before 1969. 
There may be legitimate reasons to look at some of these issues, but 
this legislation as written is much too broad. Thousands of 
organizations could be carved out of the payout requirement and 
business holdings prohibition. The bill would unwind regulations 
implementing the 2006 reforms before the regulations are even finished. 
It contains several provisions that need much more study before being 
enacted. For all of these reasons, the legislation needs more work.

                          ____________________