[Congressional Record Volume 165, Number 81 (Wednesday, May 15, 2019)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2887-S2890]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. THUNE (for himself, Mr. Casey, Mr. Wyden, and Mr.
Roberts):
S. 1475. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code to extend and
modify certain charitable tax provisions; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. THUNE. 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. 1475
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 ``Charities Helping Americans
Regularly Throughout the Year Act of 2019''.
SEC. 2. DETERMINATION OF STANDARD MILEAGE RATE FOR CHARITABLE
CONTRIBUTIONS DEDUCTION.
(a) Determination of Standard Mileage Rate for Charitable
Contributions Deduction.--Subsection (i) of section 170 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as
follows:
``(i) Standard Mileage Rate for Use of Passenger
Automobile.--For purposes of computing the deduction under
this section for use of a passenger automobile, the standard
mileage rate shall be the rate determined by the Secretary,
which rate shall not be less than the standard mileage rate
used for purposes of section 213.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to miles traveled after the date of the enactment
of this Act.
SEC. 3. MANDATORY E-FILING BY EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 6033 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsection (n) as
subsection (o) and by inserting after subsection (m) the
following new subsection:
``(n) Mandatory Electronic Filing.--Any organization
required to file a return under this section shall file such
return in electronic form.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (7) of section 527(j)
of such Code is amended by striking ``if the organization
has'' and all that follows through ``such calendar year''.
(c) Inspection of Electronically Filed Annual Returns.--
Subsection (b) of section 6104 of such Code is amended by
adding at the end the following: ``Any annual return required
to be filed electronically under section 6033(n) shall be
made available by the Secretary to the public as soon as
practicable in a machine readable format.''.
(d) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the
amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years
beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Transitional relief.--
(A) Small organizations.--
(i) In general.--In the case of any small organizations, or
any other organizations for which the Secretary of the
Treasury or the Secretary's delegate (hereafter referred to
in this paragraph as the ``Secretary'') determines the
application of the amendments made by this section would
cause undue burden without a delay, the Secretary may delay
the application of such amendments, but such delay shall not
apply to any taxable year beginning on or after the date 2
years after of the enactment of this Act.
(ii) Small organization.--For purposes of clause (i), the
term ``small organization'' means any organization--
(I) the gross receipts of which for the taxable year are
less than $200,000; and
(II) the aggregate gross assets of which at the end of the
taxable year are less than $500,000.
(B) Organizations filing form 990-t.--In the case of any
organization described in section 511(a)(2) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 which is subject to the tax imposed by
section 511(a)(1) of such Code on its unrelated business
taxable income, or any organization required to file a return
under section 6033 of such Code and include information under
subsection (e) thereof, the Secretary may delay the
application of the amendments made by this section, but such
delay shall not apply to any taxable year beginning on or
after the date 2 years after of the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 4. MODIFICATION OF RULES RELATING TO DONOR ADVISED
FUNDS.
(a) Allowance of Tax-Free Charitable Distributions From
Individual Retirement Accounts.--
(1) In general.--Clause (i) of section 408(d)(8)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``or any
fund or account described in section 4966(d)(2)''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to distributions made in taxable years beginning
after December 31, 2018.
(b) Return Disclosures.--
(1) Distributions.--Subsection (k) of section 6033 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and
inserting a comma; and
(C) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(4) list the total number of such funds which were in
existence for the 36-month period ending at the close of such
taxable year,
``(5) list the total number of funds described in paragraph
(4) which made at least 1 grant during the period described
in such paragraph, and
``(6) set forth--
``(A) whether such organization has a publicly available
policy with respect to funds which are inactive, dormant, or
do not make distributions during the period described in
paragraph (4),
``(B) a description of the organization's policy for
responding to funds described in subparagraph (A) or a
statement that no such policy is in effect, and
``(C) whether such organization regularly and consistently
monitors and enforces compliance with the policy described in
subparagraph (A) with respect to such funds.''.
(2) Effective date.--The amendment made by this subsection
shall apply to returns for taxable years beginning after
December 31, 2019.
SEC. 5. MODIFICATION OF THE TAX RATE FOR THE EXCISE TAX ON
INVESTMENT INCOME OF PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 4940(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``2 percent'' and
inserting ``1 percent''.
(b) Elimination of Reduced Tax Where Foundation Meets
Certain Distribution Requirements.--Section 4940 of such Code
is amended by striking subsection (e).
[[Page S2888]]
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Rubio, Mr.
Boozman, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Perdue, Mrs. Blackburn, Mrs.
Fischer, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Portman, Mr. Cassidy, Mr. Blunt, Mrs.
Hyde-Smith, and Mr. Daines):
S. 1480. A bill to protect law enforcement officers, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I come to the floor to talk about Police
Week and some legislation we have introduced to honor and support our
men and women in blue called, not surprisingly, the Back the Blue Act.
With regard to the comments of my friend from Illinois, who was
bemoaning the fact that there didn't seem to be bipartisan legislation
that could come to the floor of the Senate, be debated, voted on, and
passed with concurrence of the House of Representatives and the
President's signature, I note that, actually, there is a lot we could
be doing together.
I have been on the floor a number of times describing the
humanitarian and security crisis at our southern border. That is
something we could work together to address. I have introduced
bipartisan and bicameral legislation with my friend and colleague Henry
Cuellar at the House of Representatives that would address that
humanitarian crisis and, I believe, take big steps toward stopping it.
That is something we could do together.
I know the Democratic whip from Illinois doesn't particularly like
the idea that President Trump is nominating highly qualified people for
the judiciary and for executive branch nominations--the types of people
we are voting on today and will vote on tomorrow. Obviously, that is
not high on his agenda, but I submit that there are a lot of other
things we could do besides fixing this humanitarian crisis.
We could work on roads and bridges together. I know that Chairman
Barrasso of the Environment and Public Works Committee is soliciting
the views of a number of Senators and is going to come to the floor,
hopefully, in the next couple of months with some ideas on what that
infrastructure package should look like. I actually think that is the
best way to handle that.
Again, these are nonpartisan issues. Infrastructure is not a partisan
issue, but figuring out how to pay for it is the biggest challenge.
I note that Ms. Pelosi, Senator Schumer, the Democratic leader, and
the President met and talked about a $2 trillion pricetag. Well, it
seems to me that is backward. We ought to be talking about what sort of
plan makes sense and where we can get the votes to build consensus on
that plan rather than saying that we want to spend this much money on a
plan to come.
That is why I think the committee work that is being done in the
Senate, in the Environment and Public Works Committee, and, hopefully,
in the House is so important. Once the Environment and Public Works
Committee makes a proposal and votes that out of the committee on a
bipartisan basis, then, the Senate Finance Committee will be asked to
come up with a way to pay for it. That is always the part that people
want to talk about the least, but it is important.
It is important we not continue to spend money we don't have and
increase our deficits and debt. Rather, we need to come up with a user-
fee model, which is what the gas tax is designed to do, and find a way
not to pay for that infrastructure and deal with the congestion and
traffic by just borrowing from Peter to pay Paul, literally just
increasing the money we borrow and giving that tab to our children and
grandchildren to pay back. There are a lot of really good ideas out
there and ones on which I think we ought to work together.
I don't share the dystopian views of the Senator from Illinois in
terms of the Senate. The Senate is not broken. It is just a matter of
political will to try to work together to get beyond the petty
disagreements that seem to come up every day and to just do our work.
Sometimes you don't necessarily appear on TV or have your name appear
in lights when you are doing that sort of hard work, but it is
essential to get the Senate's work done and, indeed, to get the work of
the American people done. Those are some things we could work on
together if there is a political will to do so.
Mr. President, this week, tens of thousands of Americans will make
their way to Washington for National Police Week, our annual
opportunity to honor the brave men and women in blue who have lost
their lives while protecting our communities.
Of course, this includes many officers from Texas. I am particularly
proud of the Fort Worth Police Pipes and Drums Band and the Texas
Department of Public Safety Pipes and Drums Corps that performed on the
National Mall yesterday.
Law enforcement is a calling answered by a select few. These brave
men and women have chosen a difficult and sometimes dangerous life,
dedicated to upholding the law, defending or civil liberties, and
protecting our cities and our neighborhoods. They wake up each morning
and put on a uniform, never knowing what the day may hold. It requires
a lot of courage and sacrifice--both from the officers and their
families--and I am grateful for those who selflessly serve our
communities each day.
Each year for Police Week, we honor the law enforcement community to
remember those who have made the ultimate sacrifice. One of the most
emblematic reminders of that sacrifice is the National Law Enforcement
Officers Memorial, which is here in Washington, DC. It is a beautiful
tribute to the Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials who
have died in the line of duty and features marble walls filled with
more than 21,000 names. Each of those names represents an American
hero. Sadly, this year, we add the names of 13 Texans to that memorial.
These officers gave their lives in service to their communities and to
our country, and we thank them and their families for their sacrifices,
and we remember and honor their names.
Each year for Police Week, we pay tribute to those who go to work and
never come home. We honor the lives of those we have lost. We share in
the grief of their families, and we promise never to forget the stories
of heroism they left behind.
While we remember the fallen this week, I hope we will also take time
to consider how we can do more to support and serve those who have
taken the oath to defend us.
Throughout my career in public office, I have had the pleasure of
interacting with law enforcement officials from across my State and,
certainly, here at the Federal level, including our incredible Capitol
Police officers. I am continually impressed and inspired by their
professionalism, their conviction, and their unwavering commitment to
enforcing the law, and I want to ensure that they have what they need
when they put on that uniform with confidence every morning.
Last Congress we made a lot of progress, and two bills that I
introduced then are now law. The first is the Justice Served Act, which
I introduced with my colleague Senator Klobuchar, another example of
bipartisan legislation. This bill provides grants to State and local
governments to prosecute cold cases by making sure the newly tested DNA
evidence is used to investigate and prosecute unsolved cases. The
Justice Served Act helps to ensure that violent criminals are taken off
the streets and brought to justice.
We also passed legislation I introduced with Senator Peters from
Michigan to authorize the Project Safe Neighborhoods program at the
Department of Justice. This is a nationwide partnership among Federal,
State, and local law enforcement and prosecutors who use data-driven,
evidence-based, and trauma-informed practices to reduce violent crime.
It is inspired by a successful program that was initiated at the State
level in Texas, when I was attorney general, but the truth is it
started in the Eastern District. I believe it was in Virginia. Of
course, it was designed to focus on reducing gun crime and gun violence
by targeting those who repetitively used firearms in the commission of
violent crimes.
We were glad to use the examples in Virginia and in Texas to bring
the model to the Nation and to promote this proactive and collaborative
approach to prevent violence in our neighborhoods.
[[Page S2889]]
I am appreciative of the fact that our colleagues have seen fit to
work together to pass both of these bills and of President Trump for
signing those, but I know there is a lot more that we can and should
do.
Today I am introducing another piece of legislation called the Back
the Blue Act, which I am introducing along with our colleagues Senator
Cruz from Texas and Senator Tillis from North Carolina. This
legislation sends a strong message to the more than 900,000 law
enforcement officers serving in our country that we support them and
that we will not tolerate any act of violence against them, period.
In recent years, we have seen brutal and inexcusable attacks on law
enforcement officers across the United States, including one in Texas
that rocked our entire State.
In 2016, a man killed five police officers and injured nine others in
Dallas. It was a sobering reminder of the danger these officers face
every day and a call for us to take action to do more to support them.
This bill makes clear our support for these public servants who
dedicate their lives to protecting and serving us. The Back the Blue
Act would add stiff mandatory penalties and make it a Federal crime to
kill or attempt to kill a law enforcement officer, a Federal judge, or
a federally funded public safety officer. It would also make it a
Federal crime to assault a law enforcement officer.
There is zero justification for attacking a police officer--none. We
need to show that we value their lives, and we need to make it
absolutely clear that we will hold those who carry out crimes against
them accountable. The Back the Blue Act sends that message loud and
clear.
I think it is important to point out that this legislation would also
help make our communities stronger by allowing grant funds to be used
for efforts that help foster more trust between the police and the
communities they protect. This bill would better serve the men and
women who work tirelessly in our communities each day.
There is no doubt in my mind that our Nation is better and safer
because of the hard work and dedication of our law enforcement
officials. Here in the Senate we should do all we can to help them do
their job as effectively and as safely as possible. The Back the Blue
Act would be a great start.
I hope my colleagues will consider this legislation and decide to
support it and, more importantly, show our law enforcement across the
country that we stand shoulder to shoulder with them.
______
By Mr. KAINE (for himself, Ms. Baldwin, Mrs. Feinstein, and Ms.
Hirono):
S. 1483. A bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to require
institutions of higher education to have an independent advocate for
campus sexual assault prevention and response; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. KAINE. Mr. President. Sexual assault is a major issue on our
Nation's college campuses. In 2016, the Department of Justice found
that one in four college women are sexually assaulted while in school.
Alarmingly, the majority of these crimes will go unreported. The
consequences of these crimes are often damaging to a student's mental,
physical, and emotional well-being and the aftermath can drive many
survivors to drop out of school.
Sexual assault survivors deserve access to a safe and supportive
educational environment. I have met with students in Virginia, most
recently at the University of Virginia and Virginia Tech, who have
expressed the need for someone on campus to turn to for unbiased
advice, guidance, and support following an assault. Given the
prevalence of this issue, it is clear that our federal higher education
policy must do more to prevent sexual assaults and ensure that
survivors have access to and can navigate through a plethora of
resources.
This is why I am pleased to reintroduce today the Survivor Outreach
and Support Campus Act of 2019 or SOS Campus Act. The SOS Campus Act
requires every institution of higher education that receives federal
funding to designate an independent advocate for campus sexual assault
prevention and response. The advocate will help students access all of
the resources available to them, both on and off campus, in the wake of
a sexual assault and will guide them through the process of reporting
their assault if they choose to do so, acting always in the interests
of the victim, not the university.
The SOS Campus Act requires that the confidential advocate is
responsible for ensuring that survivors, regardless of whether they
decide to report the crime, have access to emergency and follow-up
medical care, guidance on reporting assaults to law enforcement,
medical forensic or evidentiary exams, crisis intervention, and
information on their legal rights. The advocate will also conduct a
public information campaign on campus to inform students of their
services, and train other university staff to provide information to
students about the advocate.
I am proud to reintroduce this legislation with Senators Baldwin,
Hirono and Feinstein, which would ensure all college students across
our country have access to a supportive advocate for sexual assault
survivors. It is our responsibility as public servants to advocate
relentlessly for reforms to prevent sexual assault and protections for
survivors. I strongly encourage my colleagues in the Senate to consider
this legislation when we consider reauthorization of the Higher
Education Act.
______
By Mr. MANCHIN:
S. 1486. A bill to amend title 11, United States Code, to include
certain pension as administrative expenses in bankruptcy, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Prioritizing
Our Workers Act, which will make changes to the current bankruptcy
code, requiring companies going through bankruptcy proceedings to pay
unpaid vested benefits, like workers' pensions, before they pay out
other claims against them.
I firmly believe that no one should be denied their pension because
their employer goes bankrupt. Hard-working men and women across the
country go to work every day for years, paying into these pension plans
each paycheck with the expectation that one day they can retire and
provide for their families.
Companies offering pension plans made promises to their workers and
need to live up to those promises, no matter what else happens to that
company financially.
In West Virginia, we are far too familiar with coal and steel
companies leaving their workers out to dry in this way. This is
absolutely unacceptable. That is why I am introducing this bill, and I
look forward to my fellow Senators joining me to support and protect
pensions across this country.
______
By Mr. UDALL (for himself and Mr. Wyden):
S. 1488. A bill to improve the integrity and safety of interstate
horseracing, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce,
Science, and Transportation.
Mr. UDALL. 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. 1488
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 ``Racehorse Doping Ban Act of
2019''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Interstate off-track wager; horsemen's group; host
racing association; off-track betting system.--The terms
``interstate off-track wager'', ``horsemen's group'', ``host
racing association'', and ``off-track betting system'' have
the meanings given those terms in section 3 of the Interstate
Horseracing Act of 1978 (15 U.S.C. 3002).
(2) Veterinarian-client-patient relationship.--The term
``veterinarian-client-patient relationship'' has the meaning
of that term as used in the Principles of Veterinary Medical
Ethics of the American Veterinary Medical Association (as in
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act).
SEC. 3. INDEPENDENT ANTI-DOPING ORGANIZATION FOR INTERSTATE
HORSERACING.
(a) In General.--There shall be an independent anti-doping
organization with responsibility for ensuring the integrity
and safety of horseraces that are the subject of interstate
off-track wagers.
[[Page S2890]]
(b) Duties.--The duties of the independent anti-doping
organization referred to in subsection (a) with respect to
horseraces described in that subsection are the following:
(1) Developing, publishing, and maintaining rules with
respect to--
(A) substances, methods, and treatments that may not be
administered to a horse participating in such a horserace;
(B) substances, methods, and treatments that may be
administered to a horse participating in such a horserace in
the context of a veterinarian-client-patient relationship;
and
(C) the use of substances, methods, and treatments
permitted under subparagraph (B), including rules with
respect to the period before a horserace (which may not be
less than 24 hours before a horserace) during which a horse
may no longer receive such substances, methods, and
treatments.
(2) Implementing programs relating to anti-doping
education, research, testing, and adjudication to prevent any
horse participating in a horserace described in subsection
(a) from racing under the effect of any substance, method, or
treatment that could affect the performance of the horse
(other than a substance, method, or treatment described in
subparagraph (B) of paragraph (1) administered during a time
period that is permitted under subparagraph (C) of that
paragraph).
(3) Excluding from participating in any horserace described
in subsection (a) any person that the independent anti-doping
organization or a State racing commission determines--
(A) has violated a rule with respect to a substance,
method, or treatment that may not be administered to a horse
participating in such a horserace under subparagraph (A) of
paragraph (1);
(B) has violated 3 or more times a rule with respect to a
substance, method, or treatment permitted under subparagraphs
(B) and (C) of that paragraph that has the ability to affect
the performance of a horse; or
(C) is subject to a suspension from horseracing activities
by any State racing commission.
(c) Deadline.--The independent anti-doping organization
referred to in subsection (a) shall publish the rules
required by subsection (b) not later than one year after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(d) Suspension of Exclusion Period.--The independent anti-
doping organization referred to in subsection (a) may--
(1) suspend a period of exclusion from participating in a
horserace imposed on a person pursuant to subsection (b)(3)
if the person provides substantial assistance to the
organization or other persons that results in the discovery
of--
(A) a violation of a rule published under subsection (b) by
another person; or
(B) a violation of Federal or State law by another person;
and
(2) reinstate all or part of a period of exclusion imposed
on a person and suspended under paragraph (1) if the person
fails to provide substantial assistance described in that
paragraph.
(e) Consultations.--In developing, publishing, and
maintaining rules under subsection (b)(1), the independent
anti-doping organization referred to in subsection (a) may
consult with State racing commissions, host racing
associations, horsemen's groups, and other interested
persons.
(f) Transition Rule With Respect to Furosemide.--During the
2-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this
Act, the independent anti-doping organization referred to in
subsection (a) shall permit the use of furosemide in a horse
participating in a horserace described in subsection (a) if--
(1) the horse is 3 years old or older; and
(2) the use of furosemide--
(A) complies with the requirements of the document entitled
``ARCI-011-020 Medications and Prohibited Substances''
published by the Association of Racing Commissioners
International, Inc.; and
(B) is within the context of a veterinarian-client-patient
relationship.
(g) Designation of Organization.--The independent anti-
doping organization designated pursuant to section 701 of the
Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of
2006 (21 U.S.C. 2001) shall serve as the independent anti-
doping organization referred to in subsection (a).
SEC. 4. CONSENT REQUIRED FOR ACCEPTANCE OF INTERSTATE OFF-
TRACK WAGERS.
(a) In General.--On and after the date of the enactment of
this Act, a host racing association may conduct a horserace
that is the subject of an interstate off-track wager, and an
interstate off-track wager may be accepted by an off-track
betting system, only if consent is obtained from the
independent anti-doping organization referred to in section
3(a).
(b) Requirement for Agreement.--
(1) In general.--A host racing association shall obtain the
consent required by subsection (a) of the independent anti-
doping organization referred to in section 3(a) pursuant to
an agreement entered into between the association and the
organization that specifies the terms and conditions relating
to such consent, including--
(A) compliance with the rules published under section 3(b);
and
(B) payments to the organization to defray the costs of
carrying out the duties of the organization under this Act.
(2) Defrayal of costs.--The independent anti-doping
organization referred to in section 3(a) shall ensure that
all of the costs incurred by the organization in carrying out
the duties of the organization under this Act are defrayed
pursuant to agreements entered into under paragraph (1).
____________________