[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 6]
[House]
[Pages 7125-7131]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         GUARDSMEN AND RESERVISTS FINANCIAL RELIEF ACT OF 2003

  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 1779) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow 
penalty-free withdrawals from retirement plans during the period that a 
military reservist or national guardsman is called to active duty for 
an extended period, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       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 ``Guardsmen and Reservists 
     Financial Relief Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. PENALTY-FREE WITHDRAWALS FROM RETIREMENT PLANS FOR 
                   INDIVIDUALS CALLED TO ACTIVE DUTY FOR AT LEAST 
                   179 DAYS.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 72(t) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 10-percent 
     additional tax on early distributions from qualified 
     retirement plans) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(G) Distributions from retirement plans to individuals 
     called to active duty.--
       ``(i) In general.--Any qualified reservist distribution.
       ``(ii) Amount distributed may be repaid.--Any individual 
     who receives a qualified reservist distribution may, at any 
     time during the 2-year period beginning on the day after the 
     end of the active duty period, make one or more contributions 
     to an individual retirement plan of such individual in an 
     aggregate amount not to exceed the amount of such 
     distribution. The dollar limitations otherwise applicable to 
     contributions to individual retirement plans shall not apply 
     to any contribution made pursuant to the preceding sentence. 
     No deduction shall be allowed for any contribution pursuant 
     to this clause.
       ``(iii) Qualified reservist distribution.--For purposes of 
     this subparagraph, the term `qualified reservist 
     distribution' means any distribution to an individual if--

       ``(I) such distribution is from an individual retirement 
     plan, or from amounts attributable to employer contributions 
     made pursuant to elective deferrals described in subparagraph 
     (A) or (C) of section 402(g)(3) or section 
     501(c)(18)(D)(iii),
       ``(II) such individual was (by reason of being a member of 
     a reserve component (as defined in section 101 of title 37, 
     United States Code)), ordered or called to active duty for a 
     period in excess of 179 days or for an indefinite period, and
       ``(III) such distribution is made during the period 
     beginning on the date of such order or call and ending at the 
     close of the active duty period.

       ``(iv) Application of subparagraph.--This subparagraph 
     applies to individuals ordered or called to active duty after 
     September 11, 2001, and before September 12, 2005. In no 
     event shall the 2-year period referred to in clause (ii) end 
     before the date which is 2-years after the date of the 
     enactment of this subparagraph.''
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 401(k)(2)(B)(i) of such Code is amended by 
     striking ``or'' at the end of subclause (III), by striking 
     ``and'' at the end of subclause (IV) and inserting ``or'', 
     and by inserting after subclause (IV) the following new 
     subclause:

       ``(V) the date on which a period referred to in section 
     72(t)(2)(G)(iii)(III) begins, and''.

       (2) Section 403(b)(11) of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (A), by striking the period 
     at the end of subparagraph (B) and inserting ``, or'', and by 
     inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(C) for distributions to which section 72(t)(2)(G) 
     applies.''
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to distributions after September 11, 2001.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Shaw) and the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) each 
will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw).
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, after the attacks of September 11, 2001, more than 
85,000 reservists were recalled to Active Duty. America's brave men and 
women who serve the Reserves and National Guard willingly leave their 
jobs and families behind when called to Active Duty. Many of these 
service people receive a military salary that is much less than their 
civilian salary, and their families are the ones who suffer the 
difference in income during their absence. The house payments go on; 
the grocery bills continue to pile up. Of the nearly 200 reservists on 
Active Duty in Afghanistan, Iraq and around the world, one-third have 
taken a pay cut in order to serve their country.
  This bill will provide financial assistance to those reservists and 
guardsmen by allowing them to withdraw money from their IRAs without 
being penalized. By being able to use their savings when needed, they 
may avert some of the hardships that result from decreases in salary. 
This would allow servicemembers that extra bit of stretch in the family 
budget so they can avoid the financial squeeze that could challenge 
their ability to keep a business going, make rent payments and afford 
groceries. All of us know every bit helps, and when we think of the 
tremendous sacrifice these men and women are making to serve their 
country to keep us safe, this bill certainly deserves and is receiving 
great bipartisan support from both sides of the aisle.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, but I do so with a very, 
very heavy heart because what my dear friend, the gentleman from 
Florida (Mr. Shaw), has pointed out is the inequities that exist in 
this war and the lack of sacrifice being shared by so many Americans.
  It is for that reason why I think that we have to take a look at the 
draft. We have to make certain that when we talk about bringing them on 
and we are not going to cut and run, that we are not just talking about 
people like these reservists that we are trying to help today, people 
who the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) pointed out cannot make their 
rent payment, families who are actually receiving charitable 
allocations of food.
  I saw a family left behind as their husband and father was in Iraq 
standing in line receiving food and clothing because they cannot afford 
it because of the reduction in salary that the reservists suffer as a 
result of performing their heroic duty. They suffer loss of income, 
many of them do not get their decent jobs back, their families have 
lost health benefits, and what are we suggesting we do today? What are 
we suggesting that we do today? We are suggesting that these low-income 
people that are being placed in harm's way, that when they dip into 
their individual retirement funds, when they are forced to jeopardize 
their retirement because of their service to their country, that we do 
not compensate them for this dramatic economic loss, we do not say, 
hey, we know how many private citizens are going there getting 10 times 
your salary, we know what their health benefits are, we know

[[Page 7126]]

what their death benefits are, we know what their compensation really 
is, we are not saying that we are going to adjust that. No, what we are 
saying is if they are forced to go into their family's retirement fund, 
they can dip into it as deep as they want, jeopardize the future fiscal 
support of their family, and we will not make them pay a penalty.
  Well, I hope Members vote aye. I hope this passes by voice vote so we 
will not have to explain this big patriotic thing that we have done for 
our fighting reservists and National Guardsmen.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I well understand the passion in the voice of the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel). He served with great distinction 
in Korea, and he knows what those sacrifices are like.

                              {time}  1145

  But he is a cosponsor of this bill. Sometimes it is hard to get a 
bipartisan minute in this Chamber; however, I think that when we do 
have to ask for a vote, that we will be getting a great bipartisan 
vote.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez), the author of this bill.
  Mr. BEAUPREZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his efforts to 
bring this to the floor, and I thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Rangel) as well for being a cosponsor of this legislation.
  There is certainly much to do. I recognize and respect that. It 
crossed my mind, though, that this is perhaps one step in the direction 
of the great bit that we have to do, and it is something we can do and 
do quickly to provide some relief to the many families that have been 
going through sacrifice, financial and certainly otherwise, at this 
difficult time.
  The Guard and Reserve have a noble tradition. Some of our greatest 
American heroes have served in the Guard. George Washington, Abraham 
Lincoln, Paul Revere, and certainly Teddy Roosevelt were all members of 
the National Guard. In fact, Roosevelt's Rough Riders were a Guard 
unit.
  Since September 11 alone, some 366,000 plus Guard and reservists have 
been mobilized, just since September 11, 2001. Currently on Active Duty 
there are about 167,000 Guard and reservists on Active Duty. I believe 
it was the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw), perhaps it was the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel), who cited an estimated one-third 
that took a pay cut, and it may be more than that, to make this huge 
sacrifice and, of course, put themselves in harm's way. It would seem 
one of the most disingenuous, ungrateful things that this Nation could 
do, and in order to maintain their life-style back home, their 
obligations back home, that their families then be penalized for 
tapping into a retirement account. Recognizing again that there is much 
that could and, in fact, probably should be done relative to the 
expanded mission that we have now found ourselves in for our Guard and 
Reserves since September 11, 2001, this being but one step and the step 
that I hope this House and this body takes today in trying to provide 
some financial relief to those families.
  This legislation is retroactive to any Guard or reservist that has 
been called up since September 11, 2001. It does sunset in 2005, but 
certainly is action that I hope, once we see the wisdom of, perhaps we 
can extend that into the future. Again, a step to take, not the final 
step, not the only step, but a logical step in providing some financial 
relief to those who have taken on such a heavy burden in serving this 
country in a time of need.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Let us move forward and take this small first step, but let us listen 
to other steps that we can take to really show the depth of our 
appreciation of the sacrifice that our men and women in the National 
Guard and the Reserves are making.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota 
(Mr. Pomeroy), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  The bill before us is not the least we can do. It is well beneath the 
least we should do. It is saying that if, when they are serving their 
country on extended deployment in the National Guard, they need to go 
into their retirement accounts to avoid family bankruptcy, that we are 
not going to charge them the penalty fee for early withdrawal of their 
retirement money.
  I am going to support this legislation because grim reality is many 
of our soldiers and their families are in precisely this fiscal 
predicament. But the leadership on the that majority side that allowed 
this bill to come up on the suspension calendar had so many other 
options, I wish it had done something more meaningful. One of the 
options is legislation I have introduced, the Guard and Reserve 
Fairness Act, H.R. 3317, and let me contrast the rather pitiful step we 
are taking with this legislation to what is in this bill.
  This bill, the Guard and Reserve Fairness Act, would allow those 
employers that continue to top off the pay of their employee who is on 
Guard deployment, it would allow them a tax credit for the dollars they 
advance holding the salary of their soldier level. This is a step we 
have to take to encourage employers to make the extra step so that 
their soldiers, their departed employees now on deployment, do not take 
the financial hit.
  On Sunday night I greeted a planeload of returning guardsmen from 
about 15 months of very hazardous duty in Iraq as they arrived home in 
Bismark, North Dakota. It was quite a scene; tears of joy as families 
were reunited after all they had been through. But to think that we are 
putting them through, on top of everything else, great financial 
hardship because the pay in the military is below what so many of them 
are making in the private sector, it is just unacceptable.
  So let us advance the step of doing much more than this so that we 
can avoid the financial hardship to our soldiers.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Oregon (Ms. Hooley).
  Ms. HOOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New 
York for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation before us today to 
allow the reservists and National Guard members to make needed 
withdrawals from the retirement accounts without the usual tax 
penalties. This will allow these families to adjust to the financial 
strain that extended deployment inflicts on soldiers and their 
families. But hopefully this is only the first step. This is a very 
small piece.
  I would like to take this moment to announce the introduction by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) and me of another simple piece of 
legislation to help our deployed soldiers. Under current law the 
refundable child tax credit provides a refund of 10 percent of taxable 
earnings over $10,000, but they have to be taxable earnings. We do not 
tax combat pay for deployed soldiers, unintentionally raising taxes for 
many families of soldiers deployed in Iraq or Afghanistan. Because of 
the quirk in the Tax Code, a soldier earning combat pay who is making 
under $39,000 a year with two children would actually be better off if 
their combat pay were taxed. This legislation we are introducing would 
fix this glitch and treat combat pay as taxable income only for the 
purpose of computing the family tax credit.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill before us today and to 
cosponsor the Rangel-Hooley bill to correct the inequities with combat 
pay and the child tax credit. All Members can sign up.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute.
  Very briefly, I think the gentlewoman brings up a good point, and I 
would point out to the Congress that

[[Page 7127]]

this is a matter that is subject to conference right now on a bill that 
is in conference, and I certainly think this is an oversight. It was 
not thought of when the child care credit was initiated, and I have 
been told that it would be germane and would be subject to conference, 
and perhaps it would get good bipartisan support.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I would ask the gentleman from Florida might he extend that 
bipartisan to join with me in asking that the conference meets. Without 
a meeting there is no agreement.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. RANGEL. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.
  Mr. SHAW. Mr. Speaker, I think, as the gentleman knows, this is the 
Senate's call at this particular point.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, when the Senate does call, I hope that the 
minority be notified where the conference is being held, that we would 
be allowed to participate.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Levin), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I support this legislation. I assume 
everybody else will. But let us recognize it as a baby step when we 
should be taking a much larger one, I would say a giant step.
  I do not think any of us know enough about what is happening in the 
lives of the families of those who are serving, in many cases serving 
longer than they ever expected, and the hardship that is happening 
financially as well as otherwise to these families.
  So we should be doing more than this. Indeed, we should have had a 
Committee on Ways and Means discussion of this, this bill did not come 
before us, to look at the panoply of legislation that we could be 
considering and enacting. One has been mentioned relating to the child 
credit. Another relates to the withdrawals from the IRAs. The penalty 
is now being taken care of. But how about when there is a 
recontribution to make up for what had to be withdrawn because people 
are serving, they are doing their duty, they are receiving much less 
pay, the families are living on much less? This was not expected. It 
was not something they could readily plan for.
  So today we ought to be looking at this legislation as something that 
should be passed, but as something that should just be the opener in a 
full discussion in this House, in our committee, about the consequences 
that are being imposed really upon the families who are really in many 
cases in some economic distress. So let us just make this the beginning 
and not the end.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lantos), the senior Democrat on the Committee on 
International Relations, and one of the most eloquent voices that we 
have in this body.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my good friend for yielding me this 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, the legislation we are considering today is the absolute 
height of hypocrisy. H.R. 1779, the so-called Guardsmen and Reservists 
Financial Relief Act, is a sham, and it is an outrage. We are calling 
up members of our National Guard and Reserves, pulling them out of 
their regular employment, taking them away from their homes and 
families and communities, and asking them to risk their lives in the 
fight against terrorism in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. And what 
does the Republican leadership of this House propose to do in order to 
help them face the financial strain this call-up imposes on them and 
their families as they risk their lives for our Nation? This 
legislation provides the tiniest of tiny benefits. The bill allows the 
waiver of the early withdrawal fees as reservists and National 
Guardsmen and women use their own retirement savings, their own IRAs, 
in order to meet their urgent financial needs caused by their 
activation to serve our Nation.
  This bill still requires that these brave men and women pay taxes on 
the money they withdraw. This means that a reservist in the 25 percent 
tax bracket would have to withdraw $10,000 from his own IRA in order to 
meet expenses of $7,500.
  Instead of considering serious and substantive Democratic proposals 
to help those who risk their lives for all Americans, the leadership of 
this House continues to adopt grandly titled legislation which does 
little or nothing. At the same time, the Republican leadership 
continues to press for the top White House domestic priority, another 
tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.
  Where is the shared sacrifice? Where is the effort to balance what 
all Americans are being asked to sacrifice as we fight the war on 
terrorism? Tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, minute waivers of 
fees on early withdrawals for soldiers fighting and dying in Iraq and 
Afghanistan.

                              {time}  1200

  I cannot understand how the leadership of this House can shamelessly 
bring this tepid legislation to the floor and claim it benefits members 
of the Reserves and National Guard.
  Months ago, Madam Speaker, I introduced H.R. 1345, bipartisan 
legislation supported by 80 Members of this body, that would provide 
real relief to the more than 40 percent of the National Guard and 
Reserves who suffer serious financial hardship when they are activated 
to serve our Nation. There are currently 170,000 Reservists and 
National Guardsmen activated to fight the war on terrorism, which means 
that 70,000 of them are attempting to get by on drastically reduced 
salaries.
  Madam Speaker, the time has come to provide real assistance to these 
families. I challenge the Republican majority in this House to take 
meaningful action that will truly benefit the soldiers in our Reserve 
and National Guard units. It is time to stop playing with sham 
legislation like this bill that we are considering today.
  Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Sandlin).
  Mr. SANDLIN. Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from New York for 
yielding me time.
  Madam Speaker, today there are 171,917 National Guardsmen and 
Reservists on active duty. They are facing increasingly difficult 
circumstances with the most recent extension of the deployment of 
troops in Iraq. As a consequence of their service, many of our National 
Guardsmen and Reservists have been forced to resort to their savings, 
savings that are vital to the economic well-being of their families.
  Many of our Guardsmen and Reservists have been forced to liquidated 
IRAs and other retirement accounts in order to pay their families' day-
to-day expenses.
  I am pleased that the bill we have before us today provides these 
servicemembers relief from the 10 percent penalty normally imposed on 
individuals making early withdrawals from those accounts. This relief 
is important, and I am pleased to support it as a first step.
  Curiously, the bill does not take the next logical step, the next 
important step. While H.R. 1779 would permit the individual to 
recontribute the money to the retirement plan, the bill eliminates any 
tax benefit for the recontribution. As a result, individuals making 
those recontributions could ultimately face double taxation. They paid 
regular income tax on the initial distribution; they would have to pay 
regular income tax on the final distribution.
  Madam Speaker, I am pleased today to support H.R. 1779, but only as a 
first step. These folks are risking their lives. Let us not force them 
to risk the financial security of their family.
  Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maine (Mr. Michaud), a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. MICHAUD. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Madam Speaker, yesterday I learned that one member of the 133rd 
Engineering Battalion from my State of Maine

[[Page 7128]]

was killed and four were seriously wounded when serving their country 
in Iraq. My thoughts and prayers are with these soldiers and their 
families.
  Unfortunately, sacrifices like these make it very clear that the 
Guard and Reserve face the same grave dangers as other military 
personnel. They are an essential part of our total fighting force, and 
they deserve the best our country can give.
  I believe this bill before us today is a good first step in the right 
direction, but there is still so much more we should be doing for our 
soldiers and their families. Instead of simply allowing them to pull 
out their retirement money early to help pay the bills, we should 
provide better pay and assistance for their families. Indeed, they face 
the same problems when they return home as other workers. Anyone who 
has been unemployed for an extended period should have the same ability 
to use their retirement funds to make ends meet. Even more important, 
Reservists must return home to a country that can provide good jobs for 
them so they can care for their families. That is the best way to honor 
our veterans.
  Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Strickland), a member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. STRICKLAND. Madam Speaker, the leadership of this House should be 
ashamed to bring this bill to the floor. We are going to vote for it, 
obviously, because it is better than nothing, but it is nearly nothing.
  The President said in his last press conference that he would tell 
the troops, whatever you need, we will provide. Well, it took the 
President and the Pentagon one full year, from March, when the war 
started, until March of this year, to ensure that all of our Guardsmen 
and all of our Reservists had body armor to keep them safe, and now we 
have Guardsmen and Reservists driving around in Iraq in Humvees that 
are not armored. They are getting their limbs blown off, and they are 
losing their lives by driving over these roadside bombs in unarmored 
Humvees.
  The only company that has a sole-source contract to provide these 
armored Humvees for our military is in the State of Ohio. The vice 
president of that company came to my office and said, Congressman, we 
can produce up to 500 of these armored Humvees per month, but the 
Pentagon is only asking for 220.
  We are doing something for our Reservists and our National Guard 
persons, but what we ought to be doing is providing them with life-
saving equipment, and the President and the Pentagon and this Congress 
is failing to do that today.
  Mr. SHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I have to rise at this particular point. This is a 
bill that gives a single benefit to our wonderful men and women serving 
us in combat. This is not the end of the legislation. This is not the 
only bill. This is not enough to do for these service men and women. 
Nobody up here is claiming that.
  This has nothing to do with body armor, it has nothing to do with 
Humvees, it has nothing to do with equipment. Those are things that are 
being addressed in another committee, and should be addressed. I cannot 
disagree with what is being said, but this is not the forum in which to 
make these types of allegations.
  This is a very good step forward, and this is supposed to be one of 
the unusual bipartisan moments we would have in this body. I really am 
very disappointed that we are getting so much negative debate on 
something that is, hey, not enough, but we are going to move it 
forward.
  Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to yield such time as he may 
consume to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Barrett), the 
coauthor of this legislation.
  Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. Madam Speaker, I rise today to support 
H.R. 1779, the Guardsmen and Reservists Financial Relief Act of 2003.
  We live in a different world than we did 3 years ago. We now know our 
borders are not secure, the oceans no longer protect us from the rest 
of the world. Enemies in the past needed great armies, great industrial 
capacities and so many other things to endanger America. Now terrorists 
are organized to penetrate open societies and turn the power of modern 
technologies against us.
  To defeat this, we must and will use every tool available to us: 
better homeland defense, law enforcement, intelligence and vigorous 
efforts to cut off terrorist financing and military power.
  There is no doubt that our National Guardsmen and Reservists have 
been an integral part of our military power since September 11. The 
members and their families have sacrificed so much over the past 2 
years. That is why I am proud to have worked very closely with the 
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Beauprez) to come up with a way to ease 
the financial burdens placed on our Guardsmen and Reservists families 
while they serve their country.
  H.R. 1779 will allow military Reservists and National Guardsmen to 
make penalty-free withdrawals, listen to me now, penalty-free 
withdrawals, from their IRAs if they have been called for an extended 
duty time of more than 179 days. Reservists and Guardsmen will then be 
able to repay these withdrawals, penalty free, penalty free, within 2 
years after the end of their duty.
  It is my hope that this legislation will give some relief to the 
families who sacrifice day to day. You have seen them, and I have seen 
them. They are in everybody's district.
  We want to help them to ensure our national security so we can defend 
our freedom. H.R. 1779 is just one way our Nation can thank them for 
what they do, each and every one of them every day. My thoughts and 
prayers remain with those who stand in harm's way, and may God bless 
each and every one of them.
  Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, let me take this opportunity to disagree in the most 
friendly way with the gentleman from Florida. This is the time for us 
to show our support for our Reservists and National Guard. This is the 
time for us to give you on the other side of the aisle an opportunity 
to show what package you would want to present so that we in a 
bipartisan way can present this.
  It is no profile in courage for us to say you are now able to borrow 
money from your pension funds and have it penalty-free, penalty-free, 
penalty-free. Eighty-eight of the 704 people killed in action are 
Reservists and National Guard. Their families know that we have about 
25,000 civilians over there that really get better benefits than they 
are getting.
  So we are only using this as a vehicle to offer you the opportunity 
to join in a bipartisan way with a package that should sweep the 
patriotism of this House and to really say we are not remembering you 
in our prayers, but we are remembering you in the pocketbook where 
these people are suffering.
  Madam Speaker, I yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from 
California (Mr. George Miller)
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Madam Speaker, we are going to 
support this legislation, but let us understand something: this 
legislation is a monumental insult to our Guardspeople and our 
soldiers.
  What we are telling them is we invaded Iraq, and now they have to 
invade their savings, that they have to invade their retirement plans 
and their savings to subsidize this war effort. Because their families 
are under serious economic stress to keep from losing their home or 
losing their car or defaulting on a loan, they must now invade their 
savings, contrary to every bit of piece of advice that they get from 
Merrill Lynch, from Goldman Sachs and everybody else about how you 
build a retirement account, that you do not invade it.
  Many of these people do not have incomes that will allow them to 
restore the savings that they take out of here. So they are getting 
penalized. They are getting penalized by destroying their long-term 
retirement future to subsidize this war because we could not come up 
with a plan, this administration, to get them out of Iraq on time or

[[Page 7129]]

to give them notice about how long they were going to spend there so 
their families could make adjustments.
  What these sailors and soldiers and Marines need is they need some 
additional pay. They need interest-free loans. They do not need to 
invade their savings to subsidize this war. It is an outrageous thing 
that we would do this to these individuals, because so many of them are 
not going to be able to pay this money back.
  Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Tennessee (Mr. Tanner), a member of the Committee on Ways and Means
  Mr. TANNER. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
time.
  Madam Speaker, I spent 26 years in the National Guard. I know what 
some of these people in the Guard and Reserve are going through. It is 
of little use, I think, for us to claim that we are giving a benefit to 
people when all we are saying to them is you can spend your own 
retirement money without penalty.
  That is a really pathetic gesture to people who are the only people 
in the country, active duty, Guard and Reservists and their families, 
the only people in this country who have been asked to sacrifice 
anything, anything whatsoever. The rest of us, people my age, I am now 
retired from the National Guard, are told, you take a tax cut.
  We send thousands of young people to Iraq and all over the world. 
``We will make any sacrifice.'' No, we are not making any sacrifice. 
They are. We are told to go shop and take a tax cut to help the 
economy. They are the ones that are making the sacrifice, and it is a 
shame that this is all we can do.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The gentleman from New York 
(Mr. Rangel) has 1 minute remaining, and the gentleman from Florida 
(Mr. Shaw) has 11 minutes remaining.
  Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Madam Speaker, because I am concerned about the feelings of the 
gentleman from Florida, and not believing that we can move forward on 
this in a bipartisan way, I am going to make an offer that I do not 
believe that he can refuse, and that is we have agreed that this would 
be a very small step in doing what we as Americans, we as Members of 
Congress would want to do.

                              {time}  1215

  We Democrats have a lot of ideas. We have a committee that is working 
on how we can best support our troops, National Guard, reservists and 
active. If his office would work with my office with the ideas that 
they have, maybe we can come together with a meaningful, a real 
meaningful, support bill to show how much we appreciate the 
extraordinary commitment that these men and women are making.
  And so perhaps once a week I will come to the floor and call upon my 
friend, the gentleman from Florida, cannot we collectively do something 
so that we are not criticizing the minimum we do, but we be supporting 
the maximum that fiscally we can.
  Mr. SHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I will say to my good friend the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Rangel) that any time he wants to meet with me, I would be 
delighted to meet with him. Unfortunately, most of the problems that we 
have been hearing are in the Committee on Armed Services where, I might 
say, that that committee has a lot of good bipartisan effort within 
that committee. But I would be delighted to share any ideas that I 
might have or that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) might have 
including one that was spoken of earlier by the gentleman from 
California, and that is interest-free loans.
  Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. 
Gibbons).
  Mr. GIBBONS. Madam Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the 
Guardsman and Reservists Financial Relief Act of 2003.
  First let me commend all of our fine troops at home and abroad for 
their efforts in the war on terrorism. I want them to know that America 
supports their unyielding commitment in protecting our country from the 
constant threat of terror. The terrorists will never let up in their 
pursuit to create devastation and chaos all at the cost of innocent 
civilians, and their lives, of course. And we cannot afford to lose 
this war, and we must remain steadfast.
  Madam Speaker, there is no doubt that through this difficult and 
dangerous struggle, our National Guardsmen and military reservists have 
continued to serve our Nation with honor and distinction. The President 
and this Nation have called upon these brave men and women to help win 
this war, and they have answered.
  Guard and reservists oftentimes leave behind not only their friends 
and family, but their private sector jobs. In doing so they may face a 
drastic cut in pay, placing their families in financial hardship.
  While our reservists are fighting to protect the American way of 
life, facing daily threats from radical insurgents and terrorists 
abroad, here in Congress we must stand up and fight for those heroes 
here at home.
  Madam Speaker, this is why I am a strong advocate for this 
legislation. H.R. 1779 will help the families of these reservists and 
guardsmen pay their bills while they continue to serve this country. I 
ask Congress to do the right thing today, pass this important bill for 
the brave men and women who sacrificed so much for our safety and 
security so that we can win this war.
  Mr. SHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Spratt).
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, there is nothing wrong with this bill as 
far as it goes. What we are trying to argue here is we need to go 
further, particularly at this point in time. The gentleman mentioned 
the Committee on Armed Services. When we had the last supplemental 
appropriation on the floor, $87 billion, I offered a package of 
benefits that went to family assistance, family separation pay, 
imminent danger pay, Tricare for reservists, a number of different 
things that we could and probably will have to do because of 
recruitment and retention problems that we will face down the road, but 
should do out of gratitude for our troops and particularly our Reserve 
and Guard components.
  So I hope we can get the cooperation of both sides of the aisle in 
crafting a package for the upcoming mark of the defense authorization 
bill which will address many areas here where things can be done 
positively that go far beyond this bill.
  Mr. SHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Madam Speaker, I say to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. 
Spratt) that I agree with him more than I disagree with him. I think he 
puts a nice positive spin on the closing side on the minority side. 
Yes, we are not doing enough, but I think now every 2 years we go 
through this.
  This bill which this body is going to overwhelmingly support, and I 
am going to ask for a recorded vote, it has been called the height of 
hypocrisy, it has been called a sham, an insult. One of the speakers 
said it was pathetic.
  Let me come back to Earth here and go through exactly what this bill 
does do. I think this is very important. Generally distributions from 
IRAs or pension plans are subject to 10 percent early withdrawal 
penalty if made before the age of 59\1/2\. And there are some 
exceptions right now that are in the law, such as distributions made 
for catastrophic medical expenses or first-time home purchases. I think 
there is also an exemption on educational funds.
  What this bill simply does, and I compliment the authors of this 
bill, it would waive the 10 percent early withdrawal penalty for 
military reservists and National Guardsmen who are called into Active 
Duty for more than 179 days. Amounts withdrawn could be repaid on an 
after-tax basis to an IRA within 2 years after leaving Active Duty 
status. The bill would apply to individuals called into duty after 
September 11, 2001, and before September 12, 2005.

[[Page 7130]]

  The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that this bill would reduce 
revenue to the Federal Government by approximately $4 million over 10 
years. That is not, in the total scheme of things in this Federal 
Government, that is not a lot of money. The gentleman from South 
Carolina (Mr. Spratt) knows this well. He is the ranking member on the 
Committee on the Budget and an expert on the minority side in this 
area.
  It is the least we can do. Is it enough? No. Are we requiring people 
to take the money out of their IRAs? No. We are simply laying down 
another tool by which these families can help themselves. There are 
already many things that are in the law that protect our men and women 
who are called upon to serve. But are there enough things? Shall we 
continue to look for additional things? Of course we should. We owe 
them so very much. We can never repay the risks that they are taking, 
the sacrifices that they and their families are making.


                             General Leave

  Mr. SHAW. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
and to include extraneous material on the subject of this bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). Is there objection to the 
request of the gentleman from Florida?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. STARK. Madam Speaker, I am in support of the Guardsman and 
Reservists Financial Relief Act.
  The courageous Americans serving in harms way should not be forced to 
suffer for their services through unnecessary financial hardship. This 
legislation would allow members of the National Guard and Reserves 
deployed in extended duty in Iraq and elsewhere the opportunity to 
borrow against their 301(k) plans and retirement savings to make ends 
meet.
  This bill may give reservists more flexibility to meet financial 
pressures. But President Bush and Republicans in Congress can--and 
must--do more for our troops who are making sacrifices on our behalf. 
They deserve better pay and better health care and benefits for their 
families.
  Several thousands reservists who were on the verge of coming home 
from Iraq recently had their stay extended. By next month, the Pentagon 
expects reservists to make up 40 percent of the total force employed 
there. In fact, more than 325,000 Guardsmen and reservists have been 
activated since September 11, many taking a pay cut when called to 
active duty.
  With the bill before us today, reservists aren't getting additional 
pay to help support themselves and their families. They're just being 
allowed to borrow against their retirement without a penalty--as if 
having to pay back their lost retirement savings later because of lost 
wages isn't penalty enough.
  It is important to remember that most people who've joined the Guard 
and the Reserves never signed up expecting to be deployed on extended 
tours of duty. Yet, they have accepted that responsibility and served 
courageously in Iraq. But, let us not forget our reservists are still 
bearing the consequences.
  Many families of Guard and Reserve troops have had to cope with lost 
income since their civilian salaries are suspended while they are on 
active duty. The military pay for most reservists is often far lower 
than their civilian job forcing many families to work overtime, use 
their savings or even go on welfare.
  Rather than putting it on reservists to make up for this lost pay, 
Congress ought to pass the Equity for Reservists Pay Act, legislation I 
support to require federal agencies to pay employees the difference 
between their civilian and military wages while they are on active 
duty. Congress ought also extend military pay raises. We ought to 
extend the child tax credit to low-income families of those serving in 
Iraq or Afghanistan.
  Although I support this legislation, Republicans have sadly missed 
the mark today. This just doesn't repay our troops for their service. 
But, I'm not surprised considering that President Bush wants to cut 
imminent danger pay and separation allowances, putting our troops 
further in the hole.
  I urge my colleagues to pass this legislation today. But this should 
not be the last step this Congress takes to help those brave Americans 
who continue to sacrifice for our nation.
  Mr. SPRATT. Madam Speaker, H.R. 1779 amends the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986 to allow penalty-free retirement account withdrawals for 
national guardsmen and reservists called to active duty for an 
extended, and further authorizes a 2-year period to reimburse their 
accounts up to the amount withdrawn. I think you would be hard pressed 
to find a Member of Congress who opposes this low cost bill to benefit 
our troops. My only question is: Shouldn't we do more? The answer is 
clearly yes. I agree in spirit with this bill, but when I compare it 
with what the troops truly deserve, I'm reminded of the commercial, 
``Where's the beef?'' come up short. The mere fact that we are 
considering legislation that allows guardsmen and reservists to 
withdraw funds from their retirement accounts indicates the problem. A 
solution for this problem must include more ``beef'' than simply 
allowing our service members to borrow from their long term savings to 
meet their short term obligations. A true solution lies in the form of 
better benefits.
  Our troops, both active and reserve need and deserve better family 
separation and imminent danger pay. Reservists serving in Afghanistan 
and Iraq need TRICARE military health coverage. Retirees deserve better 
survivor benefits for military widows and our military families deserve 
better housing.
  Recent events in Afghanistan and Iraq highlight the perils of war. In 
the FY03 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations bill, imminent danger 
pay, additional compensation provided to servicemen and women in combat 
zones, was raised to $225 from $150 a month. The family separation 
allowance, which goes to help military families pay rent, child care or 
other expenses while service members are away, was raised from $100 to 
$250 a month. Congress should act now to make these increases 
permanent. This will show our troops that we are aware of the hardships 
they face not only in the field, but also at home.
  The Supplemental Appropriations bill also provided limited and 
temporary TRICARE benefits for Reservists. It stopped short of 
providing expanded health care benefits to members of the selected 
reserve and certain members of the Individual Ready Reserve and their 
families.
  Representative Jeff Miller's bill to end the survivor Benefit Plan 
(SBP) widow's tax has 303 co-sponsors, but may never make it to the 
floor for a vote. Congress should act on this important legislation.
  We have thousands of service members and their families living in 
substandard housing. The Military Housing Privatization Initiative 
(MHPI) was passed to remedy this injustice. A spending cap was set as a 
safeguard. We anticipate reaching the spending cap by November 2004, 
and the problem has not been solved. We must raise or eliminate this 
cap in order to continue this necessary program.
  Instead of rewarding our troops and retirees with tangible benefits, 
the legislation we are debating today simply permits select Reserve 
Component members to borrow their own money in the short term at the 
expense of their long term goal of a comfortable retirement. While H.R. 
1779 allows a two year period to replace the withdrawn funds, I am 
doubtful that a financial strain that would require tapping one's 
retirement savings would permit complete reimbursement within 2 years. 
We can do better for the men and women of the world's greatest 
military. Rather than simply removing the 10 percent penalty for early 
retirement account withdrawal, I urge my colleagues to support a 
permanent increase in imminent danger pay and the family separation 
allowance, provide adequate funding to include reservists in TRICARE, 
eliminate the SBP widow's tax, and raise or eliminate the MHPI spending 
cap.
  H.R. 1779 is a low cost morale booster for our troops in the field, 
and I urge its passage today. However, the mere fact that we are 
considering this measure highlights a bigger and more lasting problem 
for our troops. Mr. Speaker, I will vote yes on this bill, but I urge 
my colleagues, especially the Republican Majority to follow up H.R. 
1779 with the more meaningful and substantive legislation I have 
outlined, which is specifically spelled out in the ``Military Benefits 
Proposal,'' which I am attaching and submitting for the Record. This 
list contains benefits I proposed when the $87 billion Supplemental 
Appropriation was offered last year. Unfortunately, the Rules Committee 
did not make my proposal in order as an amendment. I intend to offer 
many of these benefits again when the Defense Authorization Bill is 
marked up in Committee and considered here on the floor.

                      Military Benefits Proposals

       Hostile Fire/Imminent Danger Pay: Makes increase from $225 
     per month to $250 per month permanent.
       Family Separation Allowance: Makes increase to $250 per 
     month permanent.
       Hardship Duty Pay: Increases from $300 per month to up to 
     $600 per month during FY2004.
       Eliminate Out-of-Pocket Housing Costs: Accelerates from 
     2005 to 2004 the final year of

[[Page 7131]]

     the bipartisan effort to increase the Basic Allowance for 
     Housing to completely cover average out-of-pocket housing 
     costs for military families living off base.
       Family Assistance Centers: Provides $48 million for 
     increased demand on family assistance centers for National 
     Guard and Reserve to assist with problems related to 
     increased deployments.
       Transition Assistance for Disabled Servicemembers: Provides 
     $50 million to enhance DOD-VA transition programs for 
     disabled servicemembers.
       Deployment Notification to Reservists: Directs DOD to 
     provide maximum advance notice to mobilized Guard and Reserve 
     personnel on the timing and duration of their duty.
       Small Business Loans for Reservists: Provides $25 million 
     for loans or loan guarantees for reservists whose small 
     businesses have been disrupted by their mobilization.
       Vocation Development for Reservists: Provides $25 million 
     for SBA grants for vocational or technical training for 
     reserve-owned small businesses.

  Mr. KIND. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation, H.R. 
1779, the Guardsmen and Reservists Financial Relief Act, which will 
allow members of the National Guard and military Reserve forces to make 
penalty free withdrawals from retirement accounts if they are called to 
active duty for an extended period of time.
  Our National Guard and reserve forces are playing a leading role in 
our operations abroad. Nationwide, over 325,000 members of the Guard 
and reserve have been called up to active duty since September 11, 
2001. Serving in Iraq and elsewhere, these service members have fought 
side-by-side with their Active Duty counterparts in often difficult and 
dangerous conditions.
  Over the past year, I have had the opportunity to meet with many 
National Guard and Reserve members and families from Wisconsin who have 
been called up in support of operations Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan 
and Operation Iraqi Freedom in Iraq. Members of the 229th Engineer 
Company out of Prairie du Chien and Platteville, the 829th Engineer 
Detachment out of Richland Center, and the 652d Engineer Company out of 
Ellsworth all recently returned from yearlong deployments in Iraq. 
Their sacrifices, and those of their families, are greatly appreciated 
by Wisconsin residents.
  With many Guard and Reserve members taking large pay cuts when called 
to active duty, it is proper that Congress act to relieve this 
additional burden. The legislation before us today helps by allowing 
activated Guard and Reserve members to withdraw money from retirement 
accounts without penalty.
  While this legislation assists those Guard and Reserve members and 
families who need financial assistance to make ends meet, it is only a 
minor step. I, along with many other members of Congress, support 
additional tax relief for military families, pay increases for certain 
personnel, health care improvements, and reenlistment bonuses for 
members of the Reserve Component.
  Our military commitments in Iraq and throughout the world are not 
likely to diminish in the near future, and the Defense Department 
expects Guard and Reserve units to make up about 40 percent of our 
total force in Iraq by May 1, 2004. With this in mind, we need to do 
all we can to support the men and women of the Guard and Reserve who 
are called to active duty and their families.
  My thoughts and prayers are with those serving our country overseas, 
as well as their families. America is firmly behind our troops, and we 
are all hoping to see them home safe, secure and soon.
  May God continue to bless the United States of America.
  Mr. SHAW. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Shaw) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 1779.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of 
those present have voted in the affirmative.
  Mr. SHAW. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________