[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 177 (Thursday, December 8, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6924-S6927]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
By Mr. SCHATZ (for himself, Mr. Brown, Mr. Merkley, Ms. Warren,
Mr. Franken, Mr. Peters, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Heinrich):
S. 3525. A bill to enhance the security operations of the
Transportation Security Administration and the stability of the
transportation security workforce by applying a unified personnel
system under title 5, United States Code, to employees of the
Transportation Security Administration who are responsible for
screening passengers and property, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. SCHATZ. Mr. President, the legislation I will introduce shortly
focuses on a small sector of the Federal workforce. But there is a
broader message that I would like to deliver as well today. There is
something I want to say to all Federal workers: I have got your back.
We have all been hearing statements by politicians in the halls of
Congress, in the news, and even on Twitter threatening to gut the
Federal workforce, cut earned benefits, reduce paychecks, make it
easier to fire people at will, and other destructive and misguided
actions.
To Federal employees, these statements must be particularly hurtful.
Some may feel anxious and disheartened. But I want to assure all
Federal workers that I am on your side. Your contributions are integral
to our Nation. You live and work in small towns, in urban centers, and
around the country. You do crucial work for our government and for the
American people.
As the capital of the United States, Washington, D.C., is often
mistaken as the primary location for Federal workers. But this is
patently false. Eighty-five per cent of Federal workers actually live
and work outside of the D.C. area. Federal workers live and work in
every town, city, and State. In many places, the Federal Government is
the main employer--and those jobs are vital to the local economy. The
Federal workforce represents the diversity of our country.
Since 1960, the GDP has multiplied five times, new agencies have been
added to the government, and the responsibilities of Federal workers
have grown exponentially, and yet hiring has stagnated. The civilian
workforce, not including Postal Service employees, is roughly the same
size it was during the Kennedy administration, at around 2 million.
Pledges from short-sighted politicians about privatizing government
services and programs like Medicare and Social Security would cause
many Federal jobs to vanish and impair access to Federal services. This
would put real Americans out of work and cause measurable economic
hardship to local and State economies.
In addition, the government is the number one employer of veterans,
particularly disabled veterans who have trouble finding jobs in the
private sector. Freezing hiring or cutting the workforce means fewer
opportunities for America's heroes.
That is why I want the next administration to understand the
importance of Federal workers. Their jobs cannot be outsourced,
replaced by machines, cut, or consolidated. I would urge the next
administration to stop using our Federal workforce for purposes of
partisan rhetoric and political games.
I want to let Federal workers know that I will continue to work in
the Senate to fight efforts to undermine you and the work that you do.
I will look for opportunities to improve the Federal workplace and
strengthen the Federal workforce. So keep up the good work across
America. You can count on me for support.
Today I also rise to introduce the Strengthening American
Transportation Security Act of 2016, SATSA. This bill would extend to
Transportation Security Officers, TSO, the same worker rights and
protections under Title 5 of the U.S. Code that most other Federal
workers enjoy and that TSOs are currently denied.
TSOs are Federal employees who work on the frontlines of aviation
security, and make up 70 percent of the Transportation Security
Administration's workforce. They provide essential protection to all
Americans by screening passengers and baggage at our airports.
Every day TSOs stop eight guns from getting on our airplanes. That's
nearly 3,000 guns a year. They hold life-saving jobs and TSOs deserve
parity under Title 5 of the U.S. Code. My bill would provide fair
treatment to TSO's and, in doing so, would improve passenger
[[Page S6925]]
safety and enhance the overall capacity of the Federal workforce
responsible for protecting our aviation transportation system.
I am proud to introduce SATSA, which would improve the morale and
stability of TSOs, the Federal workers keeping our airports and
aviation travel safe. I want to thank my colleagues that have joined as
original cosponsors of this bill: Senators Brown, Merkley, Warren,
Franken, Peters, Tester, and Heinrich.
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. 3525
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the
``Strengthening American Transportation Security Act of
2016''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings; sense of Congress.
Sec. 3. Definitions.
Sec. 4. Conversion of screening personnel.
Sec. 5. Transition rules.
Sec. 6. Consultation requirement.
Sec. 7. No right to strike.
Sec. 8. Regulations.
Sec. 9. Delegations to Administrator.
Sec. 10. Authorization of appropriations.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS; SENSE OF CONGRESS.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) On September 11, 2001, 19 terrorists, who underwent
airport security screening prior to boarding domestic
flights, were able to commandeer 4 airplanes and use those
airplanes to perpetrate the most deadly terrorist attack ever
to be executed on United States soil.
(2) In the aftermath of those attacks, Congress passed the
Aviation and Transportation Security Act (Public Law 107-71),
which was signed into law by President George W. Bush on
November 19, 2001--
(A) to enhance the level of security screening throughout
our aviation system; and
(B) to transfer responsibility for such screening from the
private sector to the newly established Transportation
Security Administration (referred to in this section as
``TSA'').
(3) By establishing TSA, Congress and the American public
recognized that the highest level of screener performance was
directly linked to employment and training standards, pay and
benefits, and the creation of an experienced, committed
screening workforce.
(4) Section 111(d) of the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act (49 U.S.C. 44935 note) authorizes the Under
Secretary of Transportation for Security to ``employ,
appoint, discipline, terminate, and fix the compensation,
terms, and conditions of employment of Federal service for
such a number of individuals as the Under Secretary
determines to be necessary to carry out the screening
functions of the Under Secretary under section 44901 of title
49, United States Code''. The functions of the TSA were
transferred to the Department of Homeland Security by section
403 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 203).
(5) TSA has interpreted the authorization set forth in
paragraph (4) as applying to the majority of the
Transportation Security Officer workforce performing
screening functions, while all other Transportation Security
Administration employees, including managers, are subject to
title 5, United States Code, as incorporated in title 49 of
such Code.
(6) In November 2006, the International Labor Organization
ruled that the Bush Administration violated international
labor law when it prohibited Transportation Security Officers
from engaging in collective bargaining.
(7) After the Federal Labor Relations Board approved a
petition for the election of an exclusive representative, on
February 4, 2011, TSA Administrator John Pistole issued a
binding determination stating that ``it is critical that
every TSA employee feels that he or she has a voice and feels
safe raising issues and concerns of all kinds. This is
important not just for morale; engagement of every employee
is critically important for security.''.
(8) This determination was superseded by a second
determination issued on December 29, 2014, which changed the
previous guideline for collective bargaining and resulting in
limitations in the subjects that can be bargained, issues in
dispute that may be raised to an independent, third-party
neutral decision maker (such as an arbitrator or the Merit
Systems Protection Board), and barriers to union
representation of the Transportation Security Officer
workforce.
(9) The 2011 and 2014 determinations both cited TSA's
authority under section 111(d) of the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act (49 U.S.C. 44935 note) to create
a personnel system that denies the Transportation Security
Officer workforce the rights under title 5, United States
Code, that are provided to most other Federal workers,
including--
(A) the right to appeal adverse personnel decisions to the
Merit Systems Protection Board;
(B) fair pay under the General Services wage system, 2011;
(C) fair pay and raises under the General Services wage
system, including overtime guidelines, access to earned
leave;
(D) the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
(29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.);
(E) fair performance appraisals under chapter 73 of title
5, United States Code; and
(F) direct protections against employment discrimination
set forth in title 7, United States Code.
(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) the personnel system utilized by the Transportation
Security Administration pursuant to section 111(d) of the
Aviation and Transportation Security Act (49 U.S.C. 44935
note) provides insufficient workplace protections for the
Transportation Security Officer workforce, who are the
frontline personnel who secure our Nation's aviation system;
and
(2) such personnel should be entitled to the protections
under title 5, United States Code.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Administrator.--The term ``Administrator'' means the
official within the Department of Homeland Security who is
responsible for overseeing and implementing transportation
security pursuant to the Aviation and Transportation Security
Act, whether designated as the Assistant Secretary of
Homeland Security (Transportation Security Administration),
the Administrator of the Transportation Security
Administration, the Undersecretary of Transportation for
Security, or otherwise.
(2) Agency.--The term ``agency'' means an Executive agency,
as defined by section 105 of title 5, United States Code.
(3) Conversion date.--The term ``conversion date'' means
the date as of which paragraphs (1) through (3) of section
3(b) take effect.
(4) Covered employee.--The term ``covered employee'' means
an employee who holds a covered position.
(5) Covered position.--The term ``covered position''
means--
(A) a position within the Transportation Security
Administration; and
(B) any position within the Department of Homeland
Security, not described in subparagraph (A), the duties and
responsibilities of which involve providing transportation
security in furtherance of the purposes of the Aviation and
Transportation Security Act (Public Law 107-71), as
determined by the Secretary.
(6) Employee.--The term ``employee'' has the meaning given
such term by section 2105 of title 5, United States Code.
(7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Homeland Security.
(8) TSA personnel management system.--The term ``TSA
personnel management system'' means any personnel management
system established or modified under--
(A) section 111(d) of the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act (49 U.S.C. 44935 note); or
(B) section 114(n) of title 49, United States Code.
SEC. 4. CONVERSION OF SCREENING PERSONNEL.
(a) Termination of Certain Personnel Authorities.--
(1) TSA personal management system.--Section 114 of title
49, United States Code, is amended by striking subsection
(n).
(2) Termination of flexibility in employment of screener
personnel.--Section 111 of the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act (49 U.S.C. 44935 note) is amended by striking
subsection (d).
(3) Human resources management system.--
(A) In general.--Section 9701 of title 5, United States
Code, is amended--
(i) by redesignating subsection (h) as subsection (i); and
(ii) by inserting after subsection (g) the following:
``(h) Limitation.--The human resources management system
authorized under this section shall not apply to covered
employees or covered positions (as such terms are defined in
section 3 of the Strengthening American Transportation
Security Act of 2016).''.
(B) Effective date.--The amendments made by subparagraph
(A) shall take effect on the date set forth in subsection
(b).
(b) Covered Employees and Positions Made Subject to Same
Personnel Management System as Applies to Civil Service
Employees Generally.--On the earlier of a date determined by
the Secretary or 60 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act--
(1) all TSA personnel management personnel policies,
directives, letters, and guidelines, including the
Determinations of February 2011 and December 2014 shall cease
to be effective;
(2) any human resources management system established or
adjusted under section 9701 of title 5, United States Code,
shall cease to be effective with respect to covered employees
and covered positions; and
(3) covered employees and covered positions shall become
subject to the applicable labor provisions under title 49,
United States Code.
[[Page S6926]]
SEC. 5. TRANSITION RULES.
(a) Nonreduction in Rate of Pay.--Any conversion of an
employee from a TSA personnel management system to the
provisions of law referred to in section 4(b)(3) shall be
effected, under pay conversion rules prescribed by the
Secretary, without any reduction in the rate of basic pay
payable to such employee.
(b) Preservation of Other Rights.--The Secretary shall take
any necessary actions to ensure, for any covered employee as
of the conversion date, that--
(1) all service performed by such covered employee before
the conversion date is credited in the determination of such
employee's length of service for purposes of applying the
provisions of law governing leave, pay, group life and health
insurance, severance pay, tenure, and status, which are made
applicable to such employee under section 4(b)(3);
(2) all annual leave, sick leave, or other paid leave
accrued, accumulated, or otherwise available to the covered
employee immediately before the conversion date remains
available to the employee, until used, while the employee
remains continuously employed by the Department of Homeland
Security; and
(3) the Government share of any premiums or other periodic
charges under the provisions of law governing group health
insurance remains at the level in effect immediately before
the conversion date while the employee remains continuously
employed by the Department of Homeland Security.
SEC. 6. CONSULTATION REQUIREMENT.
(a) Exclusive Representative.--The labor organization
certified by the Federal Labor Relations Authority on June
29, 2011, or successor organization shall be deemed the
exclusive representative of full- and part-time
nonsupervisory personnel carrying out screening functions
under section 44901 of title 49, United States Code under
chapter 71 of title 5, United States Code, with full rights
under such chapter 71.
(b) Consultation Rights.--Not later than 14 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall--
(1) consult with the exclusive representative for employees
under chapter 71 of title 5, United States Code, on the
formulation of plans and deadlines to carry out the
conversion of covered employees and covered positions under
this Act; and
(2) provide final written plans to the exclusive
representative on how the Secretary intends to carry out the
conversion of covered employees and covered positions under
this Act, including with respect to--
(A) the proposed conversion date; and
(B) measures to ensure compliance with section 5.
(c) Required Agency Response.--If any views or
recommendations are presented under subsection (b)(2) by the
exclusive representative, the Secretary shall consider the
views or recommendations before taking final action on any
matter with respect to which the views or recommendations are
presented and provide the exclusive representative a written
statement of the reasons for the final actions to be taken.
(d) Sunset Provision.--The provisions of this section shall
cease to be effective as of the conversion date.
SEC. 7. NO RIGHT TO STRIKE.
Nothing in this Act may be construed--
(1) to repeal or otherwise affect--
(A) section 1918 of title 18, United States Code (relating
to disloyalty and asserting the right to strike against the
Government); or
(B) section 7311 of title 5, United States Code (relating
to loyalty and striking); or
(2) to otherwise authorize any activity which is not
permitted under either provision of law cited in paragraph
(1).
SEC. 8. REGULATIONS.
The Secretary may prescribe any regulations that may be
necessary to carry out this Act.
SEC. 9. DELEGATIONS TO ADMINISTRATOR.
The Secretary may, with respect to any authority or
function vested in the Secretary under any of the preceding
provisions of this Act, delegate any such authority or
function to the Administrator of the Transportation Security
Administration under such terms, conditions, and limitations,
including the power of redelegation, as the Secretary
considers appropriate.
SEC. 10. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be
necessary to carry out this Act.
By Mr. CARDIN:
S. 3529. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
for a progressive consumption tax and to reform the income tax, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Progressive
Consumption Tax Act of 2016.
We need a tax code that is fair for American employers and fair for
American families. We need a tax code that makes our U.S.-based
businesses more competitive. Finally, we need a tax code that allows us
to responsibly and reliably collect reasonable revenues.
I introduced a version of this bill in the 113th Congress to provide
an opening for discussion and a first opportunity to review legislative
language for this type of comprehensive tax reform.
Since the introduction of the Progressive Consumption Tax Act, many
policymakers, including in Congress, have become increasingly
interested in moving to a border-adjustable consumption tax base.
As we move towards consideration of comprehensive tax reform in 2017,
I wanted to reintroduce an updated version of this bill, which I think
shows what progressive, fiscally responsible, pro-growth tax reform
could look like.
As many of my colleagues recognize, the extent to which we rely on
income taxes is very out of step with the rest of the world.
Compared to other countries that are in the OECD--developed countries
with advanced economies, countries that we want to be competitive
with--all taxes as a percentage of GDP in the United States are low.
But, the U.S. is not a low income tax country. Our income tax
revenues as a percentage of GDP are higher than the OECD countries. We
have some of the highest statutory income tax rates in the world.
What accounts for the difference is that all OECD countries except
the U.S. have a consumption tax. In fact, about 150 countries now have
a consumption tax, many of which were enacted decades ago.
Unlike the U.S., these countries can tax imports and subsidize
exports by rebating their consumption taxes for exports--without
violating current World Trade Organization, WTO, rules. As important,
these countries can sustain reductions in their corporate income tax
rates, because they have an alternative and more pro-growth revenue
source--a consumption tax.
The Progressive Consumption Tax Act puts this country on a
competitive playing field by providing for a broad-based progressive
consumption tax, or PCT, at a rate of 10 percent. The PCT would
generate revenue by taxing goods and services, rather than income.
This is not simply an add-on tax. The revenues generated by the act
would be used to eliminate an income tax liability for most households.
This bears repeating: instead of paying an income tax, most Americans
households, under this bill, would only pay a consumption tax.
Those who do still have an income tax liability would see a much
simplified income tax with their marginal rates reduced--the top
marginal individual income tax rate, applying to taxable income over
$500,000 for joint filers, would be 28 percent. The current top
marginal rate, applying to taxable income over approximately $450,000
for joint filers, is 39.6 percent.
Four important tax benefits remain: the charitable contribution
deduction, the state and local tax deduction, health and retirement
benefits, and the mortgage interest deduction.
The act would also slice our corporate rate by more than half, to 17
percent.
Finally, the act would provide rebates to lower- and moderate-income
families to counteract their consumption tax burden and to replace
essential support programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child
Tax Credit. Like the EITC and CTC, Individuals and families who do not
have an income tax liability would still be able to receive these
rebates.
A key part of the act is progressivity. By eliminating an income tax
liability for a significant number of households and providing rebates,
the act is meant to be at least as progressive as the current system.
The act is also meant to responsibly raise reasonable revenues. I
know that some have concerns that the act would just provide a new
lever for the government to raise funds. That is why the act contains a
revenue ``circuit breaker'' mechanism that returns excess PCT revenues
to taxpayers if a certain threshold is met. The PCT is not meant to be
a means to quickly raise revenues while disregarding the effects of
higher consumption taxes on U.S. families and employers.
Overall, the Progressive Consumption Tax Act has many advantages
compared to past reform efforts.
First, it encourages saving. Under current law, families and
individuals are taxed on income, which includes savings. Under the act,
most households would be exempt from the income tax, and thus would be
able to save tax free.
The act enhances U.S. economic competitiveness. The U.S. corporate
income tax rate would be lowered to 17
[[Page S6927]]
percent, encouraging multinational corporations to locate here, not
abroad. OECD countries currently attracting U.S. multinationals often
impose higher consumption or corporate tax rates than those envisioned
by the act.
In fact, if the Progressive Consumption Tax Act became law, every top
statutory rate in the United States--our individual income tax rate,
our corporate tax rate, our consumption tax rate--would be at least
five percentage points lower than the OECD average.
The act encourages economic growth. In a study that examined 35 years
of data on 21 OECD countries, consumption taxes were found to be more
growth-friendly than both personal income taxes and corporate income
taxes. Corporate income taxes, especially, appear to have the most
negative effect on GDP per capita. Growth-oriented tax reform should
move away from income tax revenues and towards consumption tax
revenues, as the act does.
The act also enhances U.S. trade competitiveness. Countries with
consumption taxes can adjust their taxes at the border by rebating
exports. That means that these countries can agree to reduced tariffs
under trade agreements, can still tax imports with their consumption
taxes, and can export their own goods without a full tax load. Because
the PCT is border-adjusted, the U.S. would be able to maintain export
and import tax parity in the same way as these other countries. In
addition, the PCT is designed to achieve these benefits while being
compliant with WTO rules.
The act reduces income tax compliance costs. Most households would
not have an income tax liability under the act--although they would
need to provide key pieces of information to the IRS in order to obtain
their rebates.
Finally, the act protects low- and middle-income families from an
unfair tax burden. Through the income tax exemption and rebate feature,
the Progressive Consumption Tax Act aims to ensure that this new tax
system is at least as progressive as the current income tax system.
When my colleagues and others talk to me about comprehensive,
responsible, pro-growth tax reform, this to me is what we need to do.
That is why I am pleased to reintroduce the Progressive Consumption
Tax Act in this Congress. This newest version of the act responds to
input from stakeholders that we received last year. As important, the
act shows exactly what serious, comprehensive consumption-based tax
reform legislation looks like.
As this Congress closes and the new Congress convenes, I hope we will
stand for what is right in our tax code, and enact the type of reform
that allows our country to have among the lowest tax rates in the
industrialized world, and the fairest system for all Americans.
____________________