[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 132 (Thursday, September 8, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5460-S5462]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. JOHANNS (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Lugar, Mr.
Boozman, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Kirk, Mr. Inhofe, Mr.
Paul, Mr. Johnson of Wisconsin, Mr. Sessions, Mr. Thune, Mr.
Enzi, Mr. Moran, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Blunt, Mr. Hoeven, Mr.
Chambliss, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, and Mrs. McCaskill):
S. 1528. A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to limit regulation of
nuisance dust in areas in which that dust is regulated under State,
tribal, or local law, to establish a temporary prohibition against
revising any national ambient air quality standard applicable to coarse
particulate matter, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
Mr. JOHANNS. Mr. President, I have come to the floor many times, as
we all do, to discuss issues that are important to our States, in my
case the State of Nebraska, on issues that are important for our
Nation. Many times those comments deal with what seems to be the
constant regulatory assault on our Nation's job creators.
In meetings across Nebraska--and I did 15 townhall meetings in
August--the second and third questions I often got, if not the very
first, concerned the regulatory burden our Federal agencies are placing
on our job creators.
This administration has generated nothing short of a mountain of
redtape, including hundreds of new regulations. Of these, at least 219
have been categorized as significant. What that means is they will cost
more than $100 million per year, $100 million taken out of our economy
to finance regulation. The administration doesn't even dispute the
mountain of redtape, nor does it dispute the size of the mountain that
is created.
In a letter from the President to Speaker Boehner, the White House
identified seven regulations on its agenda, each costing not $100
million but at least $1 billion per year. These costs take important
capital out of our economy. These costs weigh on our job creators.
These costs punish the little guy, and there is no doubt about it.
This mountain is so massive, the administration has had to expand the
Federal workforce itself to write the regulations and to enforce them.
Employment at Federal agencies is up 13 percent since President Obama
took office.
With unemployment in excess of 9 percent, and underemployment greater
than that, this administration is expanding the size of government to
fuel more job-suppressing restrictions, and it makes no sense. It makes
no sense to me as an individual Senator, but it makes no sense to the
people of Nebraska.
For this reason, I am introducing legislation with the senior Senator
from Arizona to press the pause button on this massive wave of redtape
before it engulfs our very economy.
Our legislation is very straightforward. It says: Our small
businesses are getting crushed; our citizens can't find jobs. Freeze
the regulatory onslaught through 2013.
But our work simply cannot stop there. We also need some targeted
regulatory reforms to rein in government bureaucracies that are simply
out of control. Thus, I will also be introducing two other pieces of
additional legislation today to help temper the endless quest for
additional power, jurisdiction and, therefore, regulation.
The first one would close a loophole that allows agencies to grab
power
[[Page S5461]]
without opportunity for Congressional review.
Under the current state of the law, the Congressional Review Act
permits Congress to use special procedures to step in and to disapprove
of agency rules. However, in this administration, agencies have
recently chosen to use what they call ``guidance documents'' instead of
rules to achieve their policy preferences and to expand their power.
I am troubled by this trend because their efforts appear to
deliberately and intentionally circumvent American law specifically
crafted to protect citizens from aggressive bureaucracies. We have an
example, but there are many. I wish to use this one.
I am talking about a guidance document issued jointly by EPA and the
Army Corps of Engineers on May 2 of this year. It is very recent. The
guidance documents's goal is clear--to expand Federal power over
waterways.
But don't take my word for it. According to the EPA's own analysis,
the guidance would significantly expand the waters of the United States
subject to Federal control and regulation.
The Midwestern Farm Bureau has said the guidance ``defines
jurisdiction in the broadest way possible.''
This is a page straight out of this administration's playbook. If
their policy goal is rejected by Congress, they use their regulatory
power to accomplish their agenda any way they can. Stretch the law,
ignore the law, claim that the statute is too ambiguous, circumvent it,
put out a guidance document to interpret it. That is exactly what they
are doing. We have seen this playbook used over and over by this
administration and its Federal agencies.
They should have gotten the message after an unsuccessful attempt
during the last Congress to vastly expand their jurisdiction over
virtually all waters, from irrigation ditches to farm ponds. But like a
child that hears ``no'' from his parents, they jumped ahead, the
administration went ahead anyway through this guidance document.
As the North Dakota Farm Bureau president described it, the EPA's
guidance is an end run around Congress, and I am quoting:
If you can't get what you want with Congress' blessing,
make an end-run around them. That seems to be what is
happening here. And make no mistake. If this guidance is
adopted, EPA could regulate any or all waters found within a
State, no matter how small or seemingly unconnected to a
Federal interest.
The agencies could not convince Congress to change the law. So now
what is happening? The same goal is being pursued in a different way
that bypasses us. Notably, both the House and the Senate have expressed
strong concern about this guidance document. Twenty Senators sent a
letter noting that it represents a dramatic expansion of Federal power
over private land.
In another letter, 41 Senators asserted that making changes to the
scope of the agency's activities through guidance instead of through
rulemaking is ``fundamentally unfair.'' This letter requested the
agencies ``abandon any further action on this guidance document.'' This
is a very significant concern. This guidance document also has shown us
that there is a huge loophole through which agencies can circumvent the
rulemaking process in its entirety, as well as circumventing
congressional intent in order to expand Federal power.
The legislation I introduced today closes the loophole. It amends the
Congressional Review Act to cover both traditional rules and guidance
documents--no more end run around Congress. Consequently, agencies
would be on notice that the loophole through which they intend to
circumvent our will and the will of the American public is now a closed
door. In other words, citizens would have another layer of protection
from agencies seeking to unfairly expand Federal jurisdiction.
Finally, today I am introducing the Farm Dust Regulation Prevention
Act. Farmers and ranchers across this Nation are concerned about the
EPA's efforts to regulate dust. Despite what the administrator is
saying in farm country, EPA is still in the midst of their review of
the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter or,
put simply, ``farm dust.'' In rural America, farm dust is a fact of
life. I grew up on a farm. It is dusty there. We kick it up while
driving on unpaved roads or working in farm fields. Farm dust has long
been considered to have no health concern at ambient levels. However,
EPA is considering bringing down the hammer by ratcheting down that
standard to a level that would be economically devastating for many in
our rural areas. That defies common sense.
To restore common sense to these burdensome job-threatening
regulations and to give certainty to rural America, I am introducing
this legislation. The bill simply says no to EPA regulating dust in
rural America. Yet it maintains the protections of the Clean Air Act to
public health. It provides immediate certainty to farmers in rural
areas by preventing revision of the current dust standard for a year.
Afterward, EPA could regulate farm dust but only if they followed a
scientific standard. First, they would need to show scientific evidence
of substantial adverse health effects caused by dust. Thus far, the
strongest the EPA can conjure up in terms of science is to say it is
``uncertain.'' Second, EPA would need to show that the benefit of
additional regulation outweighs economic costs. These are commonsense
standards. Yet the EPA has unfortunately been unable to see the light,
making this legislation necessary.
These are three commonsense regulatory reforms that are sorely
needed: a 2-year moratorium on job-constraining regulations; No. 2,
making agency guidance documents subject to a simple up-or-down vote by
Congress; and stopping the ill-advised farm dust regulation. They would
provide much certainty and relief for our Nation's job creators and our
American workers.
I urge my colleagues to cosponsor these important efforts. I urge the
White House to support us. The runaway train of regulation is weighing
down on America's ingenuity and job creation. It is time to unshackle
American workers with these commonsense reforms.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Begich). The Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President I congratulate the Senator from Nebraska
on his typically commonsense, reasonable presentation about how we
might take steps to deal with the smothering regulations that are
putting a big wet blanket on job growth in this country, and the idea
of a timeout to stop the avalanche of new regulations makes sense. Farm
dust--the idea of regulating farm dust makes no sense. Slowing down the
ability of Federal agencies to get around the regulatory process by
issuing guidance, that is commonsense. These are three sensible steps
that would help create an environment that would make it easier and
cheaper for job creators to create private sector jobs in this country
and I congratulate the Senator from Nebraska for his comments.
______
By Mr. NELSON of Florida:
S. 1534. A bill to prevent identity theft and tax fraud; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, today I am filing legislation
aimed at stopping criminals from filing fraudulent tax returns with
stolen Social Security numbers.
Specifically, the bill unveiled today would make it a felony
punishable by as much as five years in Federal prison and/or a fine of
no less than $25,000 for using another's Social Security number or
other identifiable information to file a federal tax return and
increases penalties for negligent or reckless disclosure of taxpayer
information by tax preparers; require the IRS to develop a nationwide
PIN system in which identity theft victims can receive a pin number to
put on their tax return; and, allow identity theft victims to ``opt-
out'' of electronic filing of their Federal tax returns; protect Social
Security numbers of deceased taxpayers by restricting public access to
the records; direct an investigation by the Treasury Inspector General
for Tax Administration to examine the role of prepaid debt cards and
commercial tax software in facilitating fraudulent tax refunds; and
permanently extend the information-sharing authority between the IRS
and Federal and state correction authorities needed to prevent inmate
tax fraud and require the agency to work specifically with state and
local law enforcement officials on criminal investigative matters that
involve violations at Federal and State or local level.
[[Page S5462]]
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill 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. 1534
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 ``Identify Theft and Tax Fraud
Prevention Act''.
SEC. 2. CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR USING A FALSE IDENTITY IN
CONNECTION WITH TAX FRAUD.
(a) In General.--Section 7207 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``Any person who willfully'' and inserting
the following:
``(a) In General.--Any person who willfully'',
(2) by striking ``Any person required'' and inserting the
following:
``(b) Information in Connection With Certain Exempt
Organizations.--Any person required'', and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Misappropriation of Identity.--Any person who
knowingly or willfully misappropriates another person's tax
identification number in connection with any list, return,
account, statement, or other document submitted to the
Secretary shall be fined not less than $25,000 ($200,000 in
the case of a corporation), or imprisoned not more than 5
years, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to returns and information submitted after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 3. INCREASED PENALTY FOR IMPROPER DISCLOSURE OR USE OF
INFORMATION BY PREPARERS OF RETURNS.
(a) In General.--Section 6713(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) by striking ``$250'' and inserting ``$1,000'', and
(2) by striking ``$10,000'' and inserting ``$50,000''.
(b) Criminal Penalty.--Section 7216(a) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``$1,000'' and
inserting ``$100,000''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to disclosures or uses after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 4. PIN SYSTEM FOR PREVENTION OF IDENTITY THEFT TAX
FRAUD.
(a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury (or
the Secretary's delegate) shall implement an identify theft
tax fraud prevention program under which--
(1) a person who has filed an identity theft affidavit with
the Secretary may elect--
(A) to be provided with a unique personal identification
number to be included on any Federal tax return filed by such
person, or
(B) to prevent the processing of any Federal tax return
submitted in an electronic format by a person purporting to
be such person, and
(2) the Secretary will provide additional identity
verification safeguards for the processing of any Federal tax
return filed by a person described in paragraph (1) in cases
where a unique personal identification number is not included
on the return.
SEC. 5. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
APPROPRIATIONS TO USE FOR TAX FRAUD
ENFORCEMENT.
For any fiscal year, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue
may transfer not more than $10,000,000 to the ``Enforcement''
account of the Internal Revenue Service from amounts
appropriated to other Internal Revenue Service accounts. Any
amounts so transferred shall be used solely for the purposes
of preventing and resolving potential cases of tax fraud.
SEC. 6. LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT LIAISON.
(a) Establishment.--The Commissioner of Internal Revenue
shall establish within the Criminal Investigation Division of
the Internal Revenue Service the position of Local Law
Enforcement Liaison.
(b) Duties.--The Local Law Enforcement Liaison shall--
(1) coordinate the investigation of tax fraud with State
and local law enforcement agencies;
(2) communicate the status of tax fraud cases involving
identity theft, and
(3) carry out such other duties as delegated by the
Commissioner of Internal Revenue.
SEC. 7. REPORT ON TAX FRAUD.
Subsection (a) of section 7803 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(4) Annual report on tax fraud.--The Commissioner shall
submit to the Committee on Finance of the Senate and the
Committee on Ways and Means of the House or Representatives
an annual report detailing--
``(A) the number of reports of tax fraud and suspected tax
fraud received from State and local law enforcement agencies
in the preceding year, and
``(B) the actions taken in response to such reports.''.
SEC. 8. STUDY ON THE USE OF PREPAID DEBIT CARDS AND
COMMERCIAL TAX PREPARATION SOFTWARE IN TAX
FRAUD.
(a) In General.--The Comptroller General shall conduct a
study to examine the role of prepaid debit cards and
commercial tax preparation software in facilitating
fraudulent tax returns through identity theft.
(b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit
to the Committee on Finance of the Senate and the Committee
on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives a report
with the results of the study conducted under subsection (a),
together with any recommendations.
SEC. 9. RESTRICTION ON ACCESS TO THE DEATH MASTER FILE.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Commerce shall not
disclose information contained on the Death Master File to
any person with respect to any individual who has died at any
time during the calendar year in which the request for
disclosure is made or the succeeding calendar year unless
such person is certified under the program established under
subsection (b).
(b) Certification Program.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce shall establish
a program to certify persons who are eligible to access the
information described in subsection (a) contained on the
Death Master File.
(2) Certification.--A person shall not be certified under
the program established under paragraph (1) unless the
Secretary determines that such person has a legitimate fraud
prevention interest in accessing the information described in
subsection (a).
(c) Imposition of Penalty.--Any person who is certified
under the program established under subsection (b), who
receives information described in subsection (a), and who
during the period of time described in subsection (a)--
(1) discloses such information to any other person, or
(2) uses any such information for any purpose other than to
detect or prevent fraud,
shall pay a penalty of $1,000 for each such disclosure or
use, but the total amount imposed under this subsection on
such a person for any calendar year shall not exceed $50,000.
(d) Exemption From Freedom of Information Act Requirement
With Respect to Certain Records of Deceased Individuals.--
(1) In general.--The Social Security Administration shall
not be compelled to disclose to any person who is not
certified under the program established under section 9(b)
the information described in section 9(a).
(2) Treatment of information.--For purposes of section 552
of title 5, United States Code, this section shall be
considered a statute described in subsection (b)(3)(B) of
such section 552.
SEC. 10. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY TO DISCLOSE CERTAIN RETURN
INFORMATION TO PRISON OFFICIALS.
(a) In General.--Section 6103(k)(10) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking subparagraph (D).
(b) Report From Federal Bureau of Prisons.--Not later than
6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the
head of the Federal Bureau of Prisons shall submit to
Congress a detailed plan on how it will use the information
provided from the Secretary of Treasury under section
6103(k)(10) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce
prison tax fraud.
(c) Sense of Senate Regarding State Prison Authorities.--It
is the sense of the Senate that the heads of State agencies
charged with the administration of prisons should --
(1) develop plans for using the information provided by the
Secretary of Treasury under section 6103(k)(10) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce prison tax fraud, and
(2) coordinate with the Internal Revenue Service with
respect to the use of such information.
SEC. 11. TREASURY REPORT ON INFORMATION SHARING BARRIERS WITH
RESPECT TO IDENTITY THEFT.
(a) Review.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury (or the
Secretary's delegate) shall review whether current federal
tax laws and regulations related to the confidentiality and
disclosure of return information prevent the effective
enforcement of local, State, and federal identity theft
statutes. The review shall consider whether greater
information sharing between the Internal Revenue Service and
State and local law enforcement authorities would improve the
enforcement of criminal laws at all levels of government.
(2) Consultation.--In conducting the review under paragraph
(1), the Secretary shall solicit the views of, and consult
with, State and local law enforcement officials.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit a report
with the results of the review conducted under subsection
(a), along with any legislative recommendations, to the
Committee on Finance of the Senate and the Committee on Ways
and Means of the House of Representatives.
____________________