[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 11543-11548]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



         STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINTS RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Nickles, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Dorgan, 
        Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Helms, Mr. Hutchinson, Mr. 
        Johnson, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Torricelli, and Mrs. 
        Lincoln):
  S. 1087. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a shorter recovery period of the depreciation of certain leasehold 
improvements; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I rise today, joined by my colleagues Mr. 
Nickles, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Fitzgerald, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Helms, 
Mr. Hutchinson of Arkansas, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. 
Torricelli, to introduce important legislation to provide for a 10-year 
depreciation life for leasehold improvements. Leasehold improvements 
are the alterations to leased space made by a building owner as part of 
the lease agreement with a tenant.
  This is a common sense move that will help bring economic development 
to cities and towns around the country that want to revitalize their 
business districts. It will allow owners of commercial property to 
remodel their buildings to better meet the business needs of their 
communities--whether it's new computer ports and data lines for high-
tech entrepreneurs, or better lighting and sales space for retailers.
  In actual commercial use, leasehold improvements typically last as 
long as the lease--an average of 5 to 10 years. However, the Internal 
Revenue Code requires leasehold improvements to be depreciated over 39 
years--the life of the building itself.
  Economically, this makes no sense. The owner receives taxable income 
over the life of the lease, yet can only recover the costs of the 
improvements associated with that lease over 39

[[Page 11544]]

years--a rate nearly four times slower. This preposterous mismatch of 
income and expenses causes the owner to incur an artificially high tax 
cost on these improvements.
  The bill we are introducing today will correct this irrational and 
uneconomic tax treatment by shortening the cost recovery period for 
certain leasehold improvements from 39 years to a more realistic 10 
years. If enacted, this legislation would more closely align the 
expenses incurred to construct improvements with the income they 
generate over the term of the lease.
  By reducing the cost recovery period, the expense of making these 
improvements could fall more into line with the economics of a 
commercial lease transaction, and more building owners would be able to 
adapt their buildings to fit the needs of today's business tenant.
  We have an interest in keeping existing buildings commercially 
viable. When older buildings can serve tenants who need modern, 
efficient commercial space, there is less pressure for developing 
greenfields in outlying areas. Americans are concerned about preserving 
open space, natural resources, and a sense of neighborhood. The current 
law 39-year cost recovery period for leasehold improvements is an 
impediment to reinvesting in existing properties and communities.
  Shortening the recovery period will make renovation and 
revitalization of business properties more attractive. That will be 
good not just for property owners, but also for the economic 
development professionals who are working hard every day to attract new 
businesses to empty downtown storefronts or aging strip malls. And it 
will be good for the architects and contractors who carry out the 
renovations.
  The broad appeal of this proposal is reflected in the roster of 
supporters we have attracted. The proposal has been endorsed by 
Building and Office Managers Association International; International 
Council of Shopping Centers; National Association of Industrial and 
Office Properties; National Association of Real Estate Investment 
Trusts; National Association of Realtors; American Institute of 
Architects; Real Estate Roundtable; Associated General Contractors; 
National Retail Federation; and International Franchise Association.
  I urge all Senators to join us in supporting this legislation to 
provide rational depreciation treatment for leasehold improvements.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1087

       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 ``Business Property Economic 
     Revitalization Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF CERTAIN LEASEHOLD 
                   IMPROVEMENTS.

       (a) 10-Year Recovery Period.--Subparagraph (D) of section 
     168(e)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     10-year property) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end 
     of clause (i), by striking the period at the end of clause 
     (ii) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the 
     following new clause:
       ``(iii) any qualified leasehold improvement property.''.
       (b) Qualified Leasehold Improvement Property.--Subsection 
     (e) of section 168 of such Code is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Qualified leasehold improvement property.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified leasehold 
     improvement property' means any improvement to an interior 
     portion of a building which is nonresidential real property 
     if--
       ``(i) such improvement is made under or pursuant to a lease 
     (as defined in subsection (h)(7))--

       ``(I) by the lessee (or any sublessee) of such portion, or
       ``(II) by the lessor of such portion,

       ``(ii) such portion is to be occupied exclusively by the 
     lessee (or any sublessee) of such portion, and
       ``(iii) such improvement is placed in service more than 3 
     years after the date the building was first placed in 
     service.
       ``(B) Certain improvements not included.--Such term shall 
     not include any improvement for which the expenditure is 
     attributable to--
       ``(i) the enlargement of the building,
       ``(ii) any elevator or escalator,
       ``(iii) any structural component benefiting a common area, 
     and
       ``(iv) the internal structural framework of the building.
       ``(C) Definitions and special rules.--For purposes of this 
     paragraph--
       ``(i) Commitment to lease treated as lease.--A commitment 
     to enter into a lease shall be treated as a lease, and the 
     parties to such commitment shall be treated as lessor and 
     lessee, respectively.
       ``(ii) Related persons.--A lease between related persons 
     shall not be considered a lease. For purposes of the 
     preceding sentence, the term `related persons' means--

       ``(I) members of an affiliated group (as defined in section 
     1504), and
       ``(II) persons having a relationship described in 
     subsection (b) of section 267; except that, for purposes of 
     this clause, the phrase `80 percent or more' shall be 
     substituted for the phrase `more than 50 percent' each place 
     it appears in such subsection.

       ``(D) Improvements made by lessor.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of an improvement made by 
     the person who was the lessor of such improvement when such 
     improvement was placed in service, such improvement shall be 
     qualified leasehold improvement property (if at all) only so 
     long as such improvement is held by such person.
       ``(ii) Exception for changes in form of business.--Property 
     shall not cease to be qualified leasehold improvement 
     property under clause (i) by reason of--

       ``(I) death,
       ``(II) a transaction to which section 381(a) applies,
       ``(III) a mere change in the form of conducting the trade 
     or business so long as the property is retained in such trade 
     or business as qualified leasehold improvement property and 
     the taxpayer retains a substantial interest in such trade or 
     business,
       ``(IV) the acquisition of such property in an exchange 
     described in section 1031, 1033, 1038, or 1039 to the extent 
     that the basis of such property includes an amount 
     representing the adjusted basis of other property owned by 
     the taxpayer or a related person, or
       ``(V) the acquisition of such property by the taxpayer in a 
     transaction described in section 332, 351, 361, 721, or 731 
     (or the acquisition of such property by the taxpayer from the 
     transferee or acquiring corporation in a transaction 
     described in such section), to the extent that the basis of 
     the property in the hands of the taxpayer is determined by 
     reference to its basis in the hands of the transferor or 
     distributor.

       ``(iii) Related person.--For purposes of this subparagraph, 
     a person (hereafter in this clause referred to as the 
     `related person') is related to any person if the related 
     person bears a relationship to such person specified in 
     section 267(b) or 707(b)(1), or the related person and such 
     person are engaged in trades or businesses under common 
     control (within the meaning of subsections (a) and (b) of 
     section 52).''.
       (c) Requirement To Use Straight Line Method.--Paragraph (3) 
     of section 168(b) of such Code is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(G) Qualified leasehold improvement property described in 
     subsection (e)(6).''.
       (d) Alternative System.--The table contained in section 
     168(g)(3)(B) of such Code is amended by inserting after the 
     item relating to subparagraph (D)(ii) the following new item:

  ``(D)(iii)..................................................10''.    

       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to qualified leasehold improvement property 
     placed in service after the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself and Mr. Specter):
  S. 1088. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to facilitate 
the use of educational assistance under the Montgomery GI bill for 
education leading to employment in high technology industry, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am tremendously pleased to 
introduce today legislation that would allow veterans to use their 
Montgomery GI bill educational benefits to pay for short-term, high 
technology courses that lead to lucrative careers. I am pleased to be 
joined by my colleague on the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Ranking 
Minority Member Senator Arlen Specter.
  The GI bill allowed a generation of soldiers returning from World War 
II to create the booming post-war economy, and, in fact, the prosperity 
that we enjoy today. Today's Montgomery GI bill, MGIB, modeled after 
the original GI bill, provides a valuable recruitment and retention 
tool for the Armed Services and begins to repay veterans

[[Page 11545]]

for the service they have given to our Nation. As a transition benefit, 
it allows veterans to gain the skills they need to adjust productively 
to civilian life.
  Currently, the MGIB provides a basic monthly benefit of $650 for 36 
months of education. This payment structure is designed to assist 
veterans pursuing traditional four-year degrees at universities. 
However, in today's fast paced, high-tech economy, traditional degrees 
may not always be the best option. Many veterans are pursuing forms of 
nontraditional training, short-term courses often leading to 
certification in a technical field. In certain fields, these 
certifications are a prerequisite to employment.
  These courses, such as Microsoft or Cisco systems training, may be 
offered through training centers, private contractors to community 
colleges, or the companies themselves. They often last just a few weeks 
or months, and can cost many thousands of dollars. The way MGIB is paid 
out in monthly disbursements is not suited to this course structure. 
For example, MGIB would pay, at most, $1300 for a two-month course that 
potentially costs $10,000.
  Even if veterans claimed this small benefit, providers must be 
approved by VA as an educational institution in every State in which 
they operate in order for MGIB benefits to be paid for coursework. 
Because veterans would only recoup a small portion of the course cost 
from VA, many of the course providers do not undertake the onerous 
processing of becoming VA-approved. Therefore, many veterans with MGIB 
eligibility are forced to bear the entire costs of these courses. Many 
borrow the funds to pay for them, incurring significant interest 
charges.
  I note that last year, in Public Law 106-419, Congress extended MGIB 
benefits to cover the costs of certification exams that these courses 
prepare veterans to take. I believe that we should take the next 
logical step and pay for the courses themselves.
  The percentage of veterans who actually use the MGIB benefits that 
they have earned and paid for is startlingly low, despite almost full 
enrollment in the program by servicemembers. By increasing the 
flexibility of the MGIB program, we will permit more veterans to take 
advantage of these benefits. We should give veterans the right to 
choose what kind of educational program will be best for them.
  This legislation would modify the payment method to accommodate the 
compressed schedule of the courses. Specifically, Section 1 would allow 
veterans to receive an accelerated payment equal to 60 percent of the 
cost of the program. This is comparable to VA's MGIB benefit for flight 
training, for which VA reimburses 60 percent of the costs. The dollar 
value of the accelerated payment would then be deducted from the 
veteran's remaining entitlement. Section 2 would allow courses offered 
by these providers to be covered by MGIB.
  In closing, I note that many servicemembers leave the military with 
skills that place them in demand for careers in the technology sector. 
But even these veterans may require coursework to convert their 
military skills to civilian careers. The MGIB must continue to evolve 
to keep pace with the careers and education that today's veterans 
require. I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing the changing 
needs of our veterans, and to maintain this investment in our veterans 
and our Nation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1088

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. ACCELERATED PAYMENTS OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE 
                   UNDER MONTGOMERY GI BILL FOR EDUCATION LEADING 
                   TO EMPLOYMENT IN HIGH TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY.

       (a) In General.--(1) Chapter 30 of title 38, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 3014 the 
     following new section:

     ``Sec. 3014A. Accelerated payment of basic educational 
       assistance for education leading to employment in high 
       technology industry

       ``(a) An individual described in subsection (b) who is 
     entitled to basic educational assistance under this 
     subchapter may elect to receive an accelerated payment of the 
     basic educational assistance allowance otherwise payable to 
     the individual under section 3015 of this title.
       ``(b) An individual described in this subsection is an 
     individual who is--
       ``(1) enrolled in an approved program of education that 
     leads to employment in a high technology industry (as 
     determined pursuant to regulations prescribed by the 
     Secretary); and
       ``(2) charged tuition and fees for the program of education 
     that, when divided by the number of months (and fractions 
     thereof) in the enrollment period, exceeds the amount equal 
     to 200 percent of the monthly rate of basic educational 
     assistance allowance otherwise payable to the individual 
     under section 3015 of this title.
       ``(c)(1) The amount of the accelerated payment of basic 
     educational assistance made to an individual making an 
     election under subsection (a) for a program of education 
     shall be the lesser of--
       ``(A) the amount equal to 60 percent of the established 
     charges for the program of education; or
       ``(B) the aggregate amount of basic educational assistance 
     to which the individual remains entitled under this chapter 
     at the time of the payment.
       ``(2) In this subsection, the term `established charges', 
     in the case of a program of education, means the actual 
     charges (as determined pursuant to regulations prescribed by 
     the Secretary) for tuition and fees which similarly 
     circumstanced nonveterans enrolled in the program of 
     education would be required to pay. Established charges shall 
     be determined on the following basis:
       ``(A) In the case of an individual enrolled in a program of 
     education offered on a term, quarter, or semester basis, the 
     tuition and fees charged the individual for the term, 
     quarter, or semester.
       ``(B) In the case of an individual enrolled in a program of 
     education not offered on a term, quarter, or semester basis, 
     the tuition and fees charged the individual for the entire 
     program of education.
       ``(3) The educational institution providing the program of 
     education for which an accelerated payment of basic 
     educational assistance allowance is elected by an individual 
     under subsection (a) shall certify to the Secretary the 
     amount of the established charges for the program of 
     education.
       ``(d) An accelerated payment of basic educational 
     assistance made to an individual under this section for a 
     program of education shall be made not later than the last 
     day of the month immediately following the month in which the 
     Secretary receives a certification from the educational 
     institution providing the program of education of the 
     individual's enrollment in and pursuit of the program of 
     education.
       ``(e)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), for each 
     accelerated payment of basic educational assistance made to 
     an individual under this section, the individual's 
     entitlement to basic educational assistance under this 
     chapter shall be charged the number of months (and any 
     fraction thereof) determined by dividing the amount of the 
     accelerated payment by the full-time monthly rate of basic 
     educational assistance allowance otherwise payable to the 
     individual under section 3015 of this title as of the 
     beginning date of the enrollment period for the program of 
     education for which the accelerated payment is made.
       ``(2) If the monthly rate of basic educational assistance 
     allowance otherwise payable to an individual under section 
     3015 of this title increases during the enrollment period of 
     a program of education for which an accelerated payment of 
     basic educational assistance is made under this section, the 
     individual's entitlement to basic educational assistance 
     under this chapter shall be charged the number of months (and 
     any fraction thereof) determined by computing the portion of 
     the accelerated payment attributable to each monthly rate 
     that would have payable for the enrollment, dividing each 
     such portion by the applicable monthly rate, and adding the 
     results together.
       ``(f) The Secretary may, pursuant to such regulations as 
     the Secretary shall prescribe, recover overpayments of basic 
     educational assistance under this chapter resulting from 
     accelerated payments of basic educational assistance under 
     this section.
       ``(g) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to carry 
     out this section. The regulations shall include requirements, 
     conditions, and methods for electing and using accelerated 
     payments of basic educational assistance under this section 
     and for the recovery of overpayments of basic educational 
     assistance under this chapter resulting from accelerated 
     payments of basic educational assistance under this 
     section.''.
       (2) The table of sections at the beginning of that chapter 
     is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 
     3014 the following new item:

``3014A. Accelerated payment of basic educational assistance for 
              education leading to employment in high technology 
              industry.''.

       (b) Restatement and Expansion of Certain Administrative 
     Authorities.--Subsection (g) of section 3680 of title 38, 
     United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

[[Page 11546]]

       ``(g)(1) The Secretary may, pursuant to regulations which 
     the Secretary shall prescribe, determine and define with 
     respect to an eligible veteran and eligible person the 
     following:
       ``(A) Enrollment in a course or a program of education or 
     training.
       ``(B) Pursuit of a course or program of education or 
     training.
       ``(C) Attendance at a course or program of education and 
     training.
       ``(2) The Secretary may withhold payment of benefits to an 
     eligible veteran or eligible person until the Secretary 
     receives such proof as the Secretary may require of 
     enrollment in and satisfactory pursuit of a program of 
     education by the eligible veteran or eligible person. The 
     Secretary shall adjust the payment withheld, when necessary, 
     on the basis of the proof the Secretary receives.
       ``(3) In the case of an individual other than an individual 
     described in paragraph (4), the Secretary may accept the 
     individual's monthly certification of enrollment in and 
     satisfactory pursuit of a program of education as sufficient 
     proof of the certified matters.
       ``(4) In the case of an individual who has received an 
     accelerated payment of basic educational assistance under 
     section 3014A of this title during an enrollment period for a 
     program of education, the Secretary may accept the 
     individual's certification of enrollment in and satisfactory 
     pursuit of the program of education as sufficient proof of 
     the certified matters if the certification is submitted after 
     the enrollment period has ended.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect eight months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to 
     enrollments in courses or programs of education or training 
     beginning on or after that date.

     SEC. 2. INCLUSION OF CERTAIN PRIVATE TECHNOLOGY ENTITIES IN 
                   DEFINITION OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.

       (a) In General.--Sections 3452(c) and 3501(a)(6) of title 
     38, United States Code, are each amended by adding at the end 
     the following new sentence: ``Such term also includes any 
     private entity (that meets such requirements as the Secretary 
     may establish) that offers, either directly or under an 
     agreement with another entity (that meets such requirements), 
     a course or courses to fulfill requirements for the 
     attainment of a license or certificate generally recognized 
     as necessary to obtain, maintain, or advance in employment in 
     a profession or vocation in a high technology occupation (as 
     determined by the Secretary).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to enrollments in courses occurring on or after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
  S. 1089. A bill to amend section 7253 of title 38, United States 
Code, to expand temporarily the United States Court of Appeals for 
Veterans Claims in order to further facilitate staggered terms for 
judges on that court, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am today introducing this 
legislation which attempts to ensure there will be a sufficient number 
of judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims so as to 
decide the appeals of our Nation's veterans for disability claims. In 
addition, this bill would terminate the Notice of Disagreement 
requirement in the current law which acts as a bar to appealing cases 
to the court.
  The U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, CAVC, originally named 
the Court of Veterans' Appeals, was created in 1988 in the Veterans 
Judicial Review Act, VJRA, to provide judicial review to veterans' 
claims for benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs. It is 
comprised of one chief judge and six associate judges.
  At the court's inception, the terms for judges on the court were not 
staggered. The original chief judge and six associate judges were 
appointed to 15-year terms within 16 months of one another from 1989 to 
1991. A new judge was appointed in 1997 to fill a vacancy created by 
the death of one of the originally appointed judges. The chief judge 
retired in 2000 and his seat has not yet been filled. By 2005, the 
terms of five of the remaining judges will end.
  Because the judges' terms were not staggered, it is very likely that 
there will be simultaneous vacant seats.
  In 1998, Congress attempted to preemptively avoid the crisis of 
having only two sitting judges, and the resulting backlog of cases, by 
offering some of the original judges an opportunity to retire early. 
However, no judges accepted the offer. Therefore, we must again make 
the effort to solve this problem. The legislation I am introducing 
proposes to do so by allowing two additional judges to be appointed to 
full terms, in order to bridge the retirement of the original judges.
  Specifically, this bill would temporarily expand the membership of 
the court by two judgeships until August 2005, when the last of the 
seven original judges' terms will expire. This expansion should give 
ample time for the President to nominate and the Senate to confirm 
judges for the court, and avoid the potentially damaging effects of a 
court with only two judges.
  In addition, this bill would terminate the Notice of Disagreement, 
NOD, as a jurisdictional requirement for review at the court. The NOD 
begins the appellate process within the VA. The veteran usually sends 
the NOD to a regional office of the VA, telling the regional office 
that he disagrees with the regional office's decision, in whole or 
part. This constitutes notice that the veteran is appealing his case to 
the Board of Veterans' Appeals. When Congress created the court in 
1988, it required claims to have an NOD filed after November 18, 1988, 
the date of enactment of the VJRA, in order to be appealed to the CAVC. 
This explicit rule was enacted to keep the new court from becoming 
overwhelmed with appeals.
  However, many difficulties have arisen with this jurisdictional 
requirement, due to the complexity of the VA appellate process. 
Problems mainly arise in determining what is the applicable NOD when 
there are multiple agency decisions and extensive correspondence by the 
claimants. Also, many cases originated before November 18, 1988, adding 
to the difficulty of determining which NOD confers jurisdiction to the 
court. In addition, much litigation has occurred to determine what type 
of writing constitutes an NOD, and the type of language that must be 
used to construe disagreement over the VA's decision.
  While there has been favorable response to the court, the anticipated 
floodgates have not opened. Last year the court decided 1,556 claims. 
This legislation does not confer jurisdiction upon the court on any 
matter not currently within its jurisdiction. Instead, it is meant to 
free up the court to determine appeals on the merits. The appellate 
process for veterans' claims is long enough without a veteran being 
additionally burdened to argue over NODs.
  In closing, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill. 
Veterans appeals already take years, sometimes decades. We must do what 
we can to avoid increasing the length of the process.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1089

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. TEMPORARY EXPANSION OF UNITED STATES COURT OF 
                   APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS TO FACILITATE 
                   STAGGERED TERMS OF JUDGES.

       (a) In General.--(1) Section 7253 of title 38, United 
     States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subsection:
       ``(h) Temporary Expansion of Court.--(1) Notwithstanding 
     subsection (a) and subject to the provisions of this 
     subsection, the authorized number of judges of the Court from 
     the date of the enactment of this subsection until August 15, 
     2005, is nine judges.
       ``(2) Of the two additional judges authorized by this 
     subsection--
       ``(A) not more than one judge may be appointed pursuant to 
     a nomination made in 2001 or 2002;
       ``(B) not more than one judge may be appointed pursuant to 
     a nomination made in 2003; and
       ``(C) if a judge is not appointed pursuant to a nomination 
     made in 2001 or 2002, a nomination made in 2003, or both, the 
     number of judges not appointed pursuant to either such 
     nomination, or both, may be appointed pursuant to a 
     nomination made in 2004, but only if such nomination is made 
     before September 30, 2004.
       ``(3) The term of office and eligibility for retirement of 
     a judge appointed under this subsection, other than a judge 
     described in paragraph (4), shall be governed by the 
     provisions of section 1012 of the Court of Appeals for 
     Veterans Claims Amendments of 1999

[[Page 11547]]

     (title X of Public Law 106-117; 113 Stat. 1590; 38 U.S.C. 
     7296 note) if the judge is one of the first two judges 
     appointed to the Court after November 30, 1999.
       ``(4) A judge of the Court as of the date of the enactment 
     of this subsection who was appointed before 1991 may accept 
     appointment as a judge of the Court under this subsection 
     notwithstanding that the term of office of the judge on the 
     Court has not yet expired under this section.''.
       (2) No appointment may be made under section 7253 of title 
     38, United States Code, as amended by paragraph (1), if the 
     appointment would provide for a number of judges (other than 
     judges serving in recall status under section 7257 of title 
     38, United States Code) who could serve a complete term on 
     the Court as of August 15, 2005, in excess of seven judges.
       (b) Stylistic Amendments.--That section is further 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b), by inserting ``Appointment.--'' 
     before ``The judges'';
       (2) in subsection (c), by inserting ``Term of Office.--'' 
     before ``The terms'';
       (3) in subsection (f), by striking ``(f)(1)'' and inserting 
     ``(f) Removal.--(1)''; and
       (4) in subsection (g), by inserting ``Rules.--'' before 
     ``The Court''.

     SEC. 2. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT FOR WRITTEN NOTICE REGARDING 
                   ACCEPTANCE OF REAPPOINTMENT AS CONDITION TO 
                   RETIREMENT FROM UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 
                   FOR VETERANS CLAIMS.

       Section 7296(b)(2) of title 38, United States Code, is 
     amended by striking the second sentence.

     SEC. 3. TERMINATION OF NOTICE OF DISAGREEMENT AS 
                   JURISDICTIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR UNITED STATES 
                   COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS.

       (a) Termination.--Section 402 of the Veterans' Judicial 
     Review Act (division A of Public Law 100-687; 102 Stat. 4122; 
     38 U.S.C. 7251 note) is repealed.
       (b) Attorney Fees.--Section 403 of the Veterans' Judicial 
     Review Act (102 Stat. 4122; 38 U.S.C. 5904 note) is repealed.
       (c) Construction.--The repeal in subsection (a) may not be 
     construed to confer upon the United States Court of Appeals 
     for Veterans Claims jurisdiction over any appeal or other 
     matter not within the jurisdiction of the Court as provided 
     in section 7266(a) of title 38, United States Code.
       (d) Applicability.--The repeals made by subsections (a) and 
     (b) shall apply to--
       (1) any appeal filed with the United States Court of 
     Appeals for Veterans Claims on or after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act; and
       (2) any appeal pending before the Court on that date, other 
     than an appeal in which the Court has made a final 
     disposition under section 7267 of title 38, United States 
     Code, even though such appeal is not yet final under section 
     7291(a) of title 38, United States Code.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself, Mr. Daschle, and Mr. Specter):
  S. 1091. A bill to amend section 1116 of title 38, United States 
Code, to modify and extend authorities on the presumption of service-
connection for herbicide-related disabilities of Vietnam era veterans, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today 
legislation that would continue to respond to at least some of the 
concerns of Vietnam veterans exposed to Agent Orange during their 
service to this Nation. I am pleased to be joined by my colleague on 
the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Ranking Minority Member Senator Arlen 
Specter, and my good friend, Senator Tom Daschle, the Senate majority 
leader and a true champion of Vietnam veterans.
  In passing the Agent Orange Act of 1991, Congress demonstrated its 
commitment to securing fair treatment for veterans enduring long-term 
health consequences following their service during the Vietnam war. The 
bill before us would continue the systematic scientific reviews that 
help us understand these consequences. Provisions in this bill also 
would extend the presumptive period for Vietnam veterans suffering from 
respiratory cancers and ease the burden on veterans in proving exposure 
to Agent Orange.
  The Agent Orange Act of 1991 directed the National Academy of 
Sciences, NAS, to review scientific evidence on the health effects of 
exposure to dioxin and other chemicals found in herbicides used in 
Vietnam. The scientific reviews, there have been four thus far, have 
found evidence of connections between exposure to dioxin and diseases 
such as respiratory cancers, Type 2 diabetes, and the birth defect 
spina bifida, all currently compensated by the VA as service connected.
  These reviews will end after 2002 unless we act now. We simply do not 
know enough about the long-term effects of dioxin exposure to say that 
the body of scientific evidence is complete. The bill before us would 
direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to extend the existing 
agreement with NAS to provide five more biennial reports.
  Currently, title 38 of the United States Code allows Vietnam veterans 
with respiratory cancers to claim benefits for this disease as a 
service-connected disability, but only if the disease manifested within 
30 years of their service in Vietnam. The most recent NAS report 
confirmed that there is no scientific basis for assuming that cancers 
linked to dioxin exposure would occur within a specific window of time.
  The bill that I am introducing would remove this arbitrary limit, and 
would restore eligibility for benefits to any Vietnam veterans with 
respiratory cancers previously denied due to the cutoff. I recently 
learned of the tragic story of Jerry Slusher from Huntington, WV, a 
decorated combat veteran of the Vietnam war. While dying of respiratory 
cancer in 1999, Jerry filed for benefits and learned that he might have 
been eligible, if only he had been diagnosed just a few months earlier. 
The men and women who served this Nation, and who struggle with the 
consequences of that service so many years later, deserve better.
  Lastly, this bill would give all Vietnam veterans the benefit of the 
doubt regarding their exposure in Vietnam when claiming benefits for 
diseases related to Agent Orange exposure. Due to the difficulties in 
determining who might have been exposed to Agent Orange, Congress 
determined in 1991 that the Secretary of Veterans Affairs should 
concede exposure to veterans whose military records indicated that they 
served in Vietnam during the Vietnam era. This presumption eased a 
veteran's burden in qualifying for service-connected benefits.
  VA subsequently interpreted this law to mean that, if a veteran had 
served in Vietnam during the war, it should be presumed that the 
veteran was exposed to Agent Orange. However, the United States Court 
of Appeals for Veterans Claims ruled in McCartt v. West (12 Vet. App. 
164[1999]) that VA had interpreted the statute too broadly. This ruling 
limited the presumption of exposure to Vietnam veterans diagnosed with 
one or more of the diseases listed by the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs, rather than to any disease claimed by a veteran.
  As a result, veterans who suffer from diseases not on this list must 
go about the difficult task of proving exposure to Agent Orange while 
serving in Vietnam, and that the disease resulted from that exposure. 
This legislation would restore the presumption of exposure for all 
veterans who served in Vietnam during the war.
  This bill ensures that the system of scientific review and 
determinations for presumptive compensation already in place for 
Vietnam veterans will continue. We must address these issues promptly 
to continue to assist veterans who have already waited too long for 
answers. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to join me in supporting 
this legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed the 
Record as follows:

                                S. 1091

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF AUTHORITIES ON THE 
                   PRESUMPTION OF SERVICE-CONNECTION FOR 
                   HERBICIDE-RELATED DISABILITIES OF VIETNAM ERA 
                   VETERANS.

       (a) Repeal of 30-Year Limitation on Manifestation of 
     Respiratory Cancers.--Subsection (a)(2)(F) of section 1116 of 
     title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking ``within 
     30 years'' and all that follows through ``May 7, 1975''.
       (b) Treatment of Claims Denied Under Limitation on 
     Manifestation.--(1) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall 
     treat each claim for disability compensation under section 
     1116 of title 38, United States Code, for a disease covered 
     by subsection (a)(2)(F) of that section that was denied by 
     reason of the

[[Page 11548]]

     30-year limitation on manifestation specified in that 
     subsection (as that subsection was in effect on the day 
     before the date of the enactment of this Act) as having been 
     submitted under that section as amended by subsection (a).
       (2) In the case of an award of compensation with respect to 
     a claim described in paragraph (1)--
       (A) the effective date of the award shall be the date on 
     which the claim would otherwise have been granted had the 
     limitation referred to in that paragraph not applied to the 
     claim when originally submitted; and
       (B) the amount of compensation payable for the claim for 
     any month before the date of the enactment of this Act shall 
     be the amount of disability compensation provided for under 
     chapter 11 of title 38, United States Code, for that month.
       (c) Presumption of Exposure to Herbicide Agents in Vietnam 
     During Vietnam Era.--(1) Section 1116 of title 38, United 
     States Code, is further amended--
       (A) by transferring paragraph (3) of subsection (a) to the 
     end of the section and redesignating such paragraph, as so 
     transferred, as subsection (f); and
       (B) in subsection (f), as so transferred and redesignated--
       (i) by striking ``For the purposes of this subsection, a 
     veteran'' and inserting ``For purposes of establishing a 
     service connection for a disability resulting from exposure 
     to a herbicide agent, including a presumption of service-
     connection under this section, a veteran''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and has a disease referred to in 
     paragraph (1)(B) of this subsection''.
       (2)(A) The section heading of that section is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``Sec. 1116. Presumptions of service connection for diseases 
       associated with exposure to certain herbicide agents; 
       presumption of exposure''.

       (B) The table of section at the beginning of chapter 11 of 
     that title is amended by striking the item relating to 
     section 1116 and inserting the following new item:

``1116. Presumptions of service connection for diseases associated with 
              exposure to certain herbicide agents; presumption of 
              exposure.''.
       (d) Extension of Authority To Presume Service-Connection 
     for Additional Diseases.--(1) Subsection (e) of section 1116 
     of title 38, United States Code, is amended by striking ``10 
     years'' and inserting ``20 years''.
       (2) Section 3(i) of the Agent Orange Act of 1991 (38 U.S.C. 
     1116 note) is amended by striking ``10 years'' and inserting 
     ``20 years''.
       (e) Technical Amendment.--Subsection (a)(2)(F) of section 
     1116 of title 38, United States Code, as amended by 
     subsection (a) of this section, is further amended by 
     inserting ``of disability'' after ``manifest to a degree''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. Murray, and 
        Mr. Inouye):
  S. 1094. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for 
research, information, and education with respect to blood cancer; to 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. HUTCHISON. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by Senator 
Mikulski and Senator Murray to offer legislation on a critical health 
research issue. When I first started looking into the Federal 
commitment to these deadly blood cancers, leukemia, lymphoma, and 
multiple myeloma, I was frankly astonished to learn that, despite the 
fact that these cancers account for 11 percent of all cancer deaths in 
the U.S., they receive less than 5 percent of the research funding from 
the National Cancer Institute.
  That is why I would like to offer legislation today that would 
authorize an additional $250 million in research at the National 
Institutes of Health next year, and at least that amount in subsequent 
years. The bill also contains the specific authorization of $25 million 
next year to expand public education, outreach, and early detection 
programs for three of these deadly blood cancers.
  It is my hope and my expectation that this legislation will serve to 
focus additional resources on these diseases, as well as to help expand 
the public's awareness of how deadly and pervasive they can be.
  I commend the Senators from Maryland and Washington for their support 
on this issue and urge other Senators to join us in this effort.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1094

       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 ``Hematological Cancer 
     Research Investment and Education Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that:
       (1) An estimated 109,500 people in the United States will 
     be diagnosed with leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma in 
     2001.
       (2) New cases of the blood cancers described in paragraph 
     (1) account for 8.6 percent of new cancer cases.
       (3) Those devastating blood cancers will cause the deaths 
     of an estimated 60,300 persons in the United States in 2001. 
     Every 9 minutes, a person in the United States dies from 
     leukemia, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma.
       (4) While less than 5 percent of Federal funds for cancer 
     research are spent on those blood cancers, those blood 
     cancers cause 11 percent of all cancer deaths in the United 
     States.
       (5) Increased Federal support of research into leukemia, 
     lymphoma, and multiple myeloma has resulted and will continue 
     to result in significant advances in the early detection, the 
     treatment, and ultimately the cure of those blood cancers.

     SEC. 3. RESEARCH, INFORMATION, AND EDUCATION WITH RESPECT TO 
                   BLOOD CANCER.

       (a) Research.--Part B of title IV of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 284 et seq.) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

     ``SEC. 409I. RESEARCH, INFORMATION, AND EDUCATION WITH 
                   RESPECT TO BLOOD CANCER.

       ``(a) Research.--
       ``(1) Subject.--The Director of the National Institutes of 
     Health shall establish and carry out a program for the 
     conduct and support of research with respect to blood cancer, 
     and particularly with respect to leukemia, lymphoma, and 
     multiple myeloma.
       ``(2) Administration.--The Director of the National 
     Institutes of Health shall carry out this subsection through 
     the Director of the National Cancer Institute and in 
     collaboration with any other agencies that the Director of 
     the National Institutes of Health determines to be 
     appropriate.
       ``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $250,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2002 and each subsequent fiscal year.
       ``(b) Information and Education.--
       ``(1) Subject.--The Director of the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention shall establish and carry out a 
     program to provide information and education for the general 
     public with respect to blood cancer, and particularly with 
     respect to leukemia, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma.
       ``(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $25,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2002 and each subsequent fiscal year.''.

                          ____________________