[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 26919-26930]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION EXTENSION ACT OF 2009

  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in 
the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 3548) to amend the Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 2008 to provide for the temporary availability of 
certain additional emergency unemployment compensation, and for other 
purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the Senate amendment is as follows:

       Senate amendment:
       Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
     following:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Worker, Homeownership, and 
     Business Assistance Act of 2009''.

     SEC. 2. REVISIONS TO SECOND-TIER BENEFITS.

       (a) In General.--Section 4002(c) of the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304 
     note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``If'' and all that follows through ``paragraph (2))'' and 
     inserting ``At the time that the amount established in an 
     individual's account under subsection (b)(1) is exhausted'';
       (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``50 percent'' and 
     inserting ``54 percent''; and
       (C) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``13'' and inserting 
     ``14'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (2); and
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (2).
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply as if included in the enactment of the 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008, except that no amount 
     shall be payable by virtue of such amendments with respect to 
     any week of unemployment commencing before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 3. THIRD-TIER EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 4002 of the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304 
     note) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(d) Third-tier Emergency Unemployment Compensation.--
       ``(1) In general.--If, at the time that the amount added to 
     an individual's account under subsection (c)(1) (hereinafter 
     `second-tier emergency unemployment compensation') is 
     exhausted or at any time thereafter, such individual's State 
     is in an extended benefit period (as determined under 
     paragraph (2)), such account shall be further augmented by an 
     amount (hereinafter `third-tier emergency unemployment 
     compensation') equal to the lesser of--
       ``(A) 50 percent of the total amount of regular 
     compensation (including dependents' allowances) payable to 
     the individual during the individual's benefit year under the 
     State law; or
       ``(B) 13 times the individual's average weekly benefit 
     amount (as determined under subsection (b)(2)) for the 
     benefit year.
       ``(2) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of paragraph 
     (1), a State shall be considered to be in an extended benefit 
     period, as of any given time, if--
       ``(A) such a period would then be in effect for such State 
     under such Act if section 203(d) of such Act--
       ``(i) were applied by substituting `4' for `5' each place 
     it appears; and
       ``(ii) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A) thereof; or
       ``(B) such a period would then be in effect for such State 
     under such Act if--
       ``(i) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(ii) such section 203(f)--

       ``(I) were applied by substituting `6.0' for `6.5' in 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; and
       ``(II) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.

       ``(3) Limitation.--The account of an individual may be 
     augmented not more than once under this subsection.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment to Non-augmentation Rule.--Section 
     4007(b)(2) of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 
     (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``then section 4002(c)'' and inserting 
     ``then subsections (c) and (d) of section 4002''; and

[[Page 26920]]

       (2) by striking ``paragraph (2) of such section)'' and 
     inserting ``paragraph (2) of such subsection (c) or (d) (as 
     the case may be))''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply as if included in the enactment of the 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008, except that no amount 
     shall be payable by virtue of such amendments with respect to 
     any week of unemployment commencing before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 4. FOURTH-TIER EMERGENCY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

       (a) In General.--Section 4002 of the Supplemental 
     Appropriations Act, 2008 (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304 
     note), as amended by section 3(a), is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsection:
       ``(e) Fourth-tier Emergency Unemployment Compensation.--
       ``(1) In general.--If, at the time that the amount added to 
     an individual's account under subsection (d)(1) (third-tier 
     emergency unemployment compensation) is exhausted or at any 
     time thereafter, such individual's State is in an extended 
     benefit period (as determined under paragraph (2)), such 
     account shall be further augmented by an amount (hereinafter 
     `fourth-tier emergency unemployment compensation') equal to 
     the lesser of--
       ``(A) 24 percent of the total amount of regular 
     compensation (including dependents' allowances) payable to 
     the individual during the individual's benefit year under the 
     State law; or
       ``(B) 6 times the individual's average weekly benefit 
     amount (as determined under subsection (b)(2)) for the 
     benefit year.
       ``(2) Extended benefit period.--For purposes of paragraph 
     (1), a State shall be considered to be in an extended benefit 
     period, as of any given time, if--
       ``(A) such a period would then be in effect for such State 
     under such Act if section 203(d) of such Act--
       ``(i) were applied by substituting `6' for `5' each place 
     it appears; and
       ``(ii) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A) thereof; or
       ``(B) such a period would then be in effect for such State 
     under such Act if--
       ``(i) section 203(f) of such Act were applied to such State 
     (regardless of whether the State by law had provided for such 
     application); and
       ``(ii) such section 203(f)--

       ``(I) were applied by substituting `8.5' for `6.5' in 
     paragraph (1)(A)(i) thereof; and
       ``(II) did not include the requirement under paragraph 
     (1)(A)(ii) thereof.

       ``(3) Limitation.--The account of an individual may be 
     augmented not more than once under this subsection.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment to Non-augmentation Rule.--Section 
     4007(b)(2) of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 
     (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304 note), as amended by 
     section 3(b), is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and (d)'' and inserting ``, (d), and (e) 
     of section 4002''; and
       (2) by striking ``or (d)'' and inserting ``, (d), or (e) 
     (as the case may be))''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply as if included in the enactment of the 
     Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008, except that no amount 
     shall be payable by virtue of such amendments with respect to 
     any week of unemployment commencing before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. COORDINATION.

       Section 4002 of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 
     (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304 note), as amended by 
     section 4, is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(f) Coordination Rules.--
       ``(1) Coordination with extended compensation.--
     Notwithstanding an election under section 4001(e) by a State 
     to provide for the payment of emergency unemployment 
     compensation prior to extended compensation, such State may 
     pay extended compensation to an otherwise eligible individual 
     prior to any emergency unemployment compensation under 
     subsection (c), (d), or (e) (by reason of the amendments made 
     by sections 2, 3, and 4 of the Worker, Homeownership, and 
     Business Assistance Act of 2009), if such individual claimed 
     extended compensation for at least 1 week of unemployment 
     after the exhaustion of emergency unemployment compensation 
     under subsection (b) (as such subsection was in effect on the 
     day before the date of the enactment of this subsection).
       ``(2) Coordination with tiers ii, iii, and iv.--If a State 
     determines that implementation of the increased entitlement 
     to second-tier emergency unemployment compensation by reason 
     of the amendments made by section 2 of the Worker, 
     Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 would 
     unduly delay the prompt payment of emergency unemployment 
     compensation under this title by reason of the amendments 
     made by such Act, such State may elect to pay third-tier 
     emergency unemployment compensation prior to the payment of 
     such increased second-tier emergency unemployment 
     compensation until such time as such State determines that 
     such increased second-tier emergency unemployment 
     compensation may be paid without such undue delay. If a State 
     makes the election under the preceding sentence, then, for 
     purposes of determining whether an account may be augmented 
     for fourth-tier emergency unemployment compensation under 
     subsection (e), such State shall treat the date of exhaustion 
     of such increased second-tier emergency unemployment 
     compensation as the date of exhaustion of third-tier 
     emergency unemployment compensation, if such date is later 
     than the date of exhaustion of the third-tier emergency 
     unemployment compensation.''.

     SEC. 6. TRANSFER OF FUNDS.

       Section 4004(e)(1) of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 
     2008 (Public Law 110-252; 26 U.S.C. 3304 note) is amended by 
     striking ``Act;'' and inserting ``Act and sections 2, 3, and 
     4 of the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act 
     of 2009;''.

     SEC. 7. EXPANSION OF MODERNIZATION GRANTS FOR UNEMPLOYMENT 
                   RESULTING FROM COMPELLING FAMILY REASON.

       (a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 903(f)(3)(B) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1103(f)(3)(B)) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(i) One or both of the following offenses as selected by 
     the State, but in making such selection, the resulting change 
     in the State law shall not supercede any other provision of 
     law relating to unemployment insurance to the extent that 
     such other provision provides broader access to unemployment 
     benefits for victims of such selected offense or offenses:

       ``(I) Domestic violence, verified by such reasonable and 
     confidential documentation as the State law may require, 
     which causes the individual reasonably to believe that such 
     individual's continued employment would jeopardize the safety 
     of the individual or of any member of the individual's 
     immediate family (as defined by the Secretary of Labor); and
       ``(II) Sexual assault, verified by such reasonable and 
     confidential documentation as the State law may require, 
     which causes the individual reasonably to believe that such 
     individual's continued employment would jeopardize the safety 
     of the individual or of any member of the individual's 
     immediate family (as defined by the Secretary of Labor).''.

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to State applications submitted on 
     and after January 1, 2010.

     SEC. 8. TREATMENT OF ADDITIONAL REGULAR COMPENSATION.

       The monthly equivalent of any additional compensation paid 
     by reason of section 2002 of the Assistance for Unemployed 
     Workers and Struggling Families Act, as contained in Public 
     Law 111-5 (26 U.S.C. 3304 note; 123 Stat. 438) shall be 
     disregarded after the date of the enactment of this Act in 
     considering the amount of income and assets of an individual 
     for purposes of determining such individual's eligibility 
     for, or amount of, benefits under the Supplemental Nutrition 
     Assistance Program (SNAP).

     SEC. 9. ADDITIONAL EXTENDED UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS UNDER THE 
                   RAILROAD UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT.

       (a) Benefits.--Section 2(c)(2)(D) of the Railroad 
     Unemployment Insurance Act, as added by section 2006 of the 
     American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 
     111-5), is amended--
       (1) in clause (iii)--
       (A) by striking ``June 30, 2009'' and inserting ``June 30, 
     2010''; and
       (B) by striking ``December 31, 2009'' and inserting 
     ``December 31, 2010''; and
       (2) by adding at the end of clause (iv) the following: ``In 
     addition to the amount appropriated by the preceding 
     sentence, out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise 
     appropriated, there are appropriated $175,000,000 to cover 
     the cost of additional extended unemployment benefits 
     provided under this subparagraph, to remain available until 
     expended.''.
       (b) Administrative Expenses.--Section 2006 of division B of 
     the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public 
     Law 111-5; 123 Stat. 445) is amended by adding at the end of 
     subsection (b) the following: ``In addition to funds 
     appropriated by the preceding sentence, out of any funds in 
     the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, there are 
     appropriated to the Railroad Retirement Board $807,000 to 
     cover the administrative expenses associated with the payment 
     of additional extended unemployment benefits under section 
     2(c)(2)(D) of the Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act, to 
     remain available until expended.''.

     SEC. 10. 0.2 PERCENT FUTA SURTAX.

       (a) In General.--Section 3301 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to rate of tax) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``through 2009'' in paragraph (1) and 
     inserting ``through 2010 and the first 6 months of calendar 
     year 2011'',
       (2) by striking ``calendar year 2010'' in paragraph (2) and 
     inserting ``the remainder of calendar year 2011'', and
       (3) by inserting ``(or portion of the calendar year)'' 
     after ``during the calendar year''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to wages paid after December 31, 2009.

     SEC. 11. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYER 
                   TAX CREDIT.

       (a) Extension of Application Period.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (h) of section 36 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (A) by striking ``December 1, 2009'' and inserting ``May 1, 
     2010'',
       (B) by striking ``Section.--This section'' and inserting 
     ``Section.--
       ``(1) In general.--This section'', and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Exception in case of binding contract.--In the case 
     of any taxpayer who enters into a written binding contract 
     before May 1, 2010, to close on the purchase of a principal 
     residence before July 1, 2010, paragraph (1) shall be applied 
     by substituting `July 1, 2010' for `May 1, 2010'.''.

[[Page 26921]]

       (2) Waiver of recapture.--
       (A) In general.--Subparagraph (D) of section 36(f)(4) of 
     such Code is amended by striking ``, and before December 1, 
     2009''.
       (B) Conforming amendment.--The heading of such subparagraph 
     (D) is amended by inserting ``and 2010'' after ``2009''.
       (3) Election to treat purchase in prior year.--Subsection 
     (g) of section 36 of such Code is amended to read as follows:
       ``(g) Election To Treat Purchase in Prior Year.--In the 
     case of a purchase of a principal residence after December 
     31, 2008, a taxpayer may elect to treat such purchase as made 
     on December 31 of the calendar year preceding such purchase 
     for purposes of this section (other than subsections (c), 
     (f)(4)(D), and (h)).''.
       (b) Special Rule for Long-time Residents of Same Principal 
     Residence.--Subsection (c) of section 36 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(6) Exception for long-time residents of same principal 
     residence.--In the case of an individual (and, if married, 
     such individual's spouse) who has owned and used the same 
     residence as such individual's principal residence for any 5-
     consecutive-year period during the 8-year period ending on 
     the date of the purchase of a subsequent principal residence, 
     such individual shall be treated as a first-time homebuyer 
     for purposes of this section with respect to the purchase of 
     such subsequent residence.''.
       (c) Modification of Dollar and Income Limitations.--
       (1) Dollar limitation.--Subsection (b)(1) of section 36 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) Special rule for long-time residents of same 
     principal residence.--In the case of a taxpayer to whom a 
     credit under subsection (a) is allowed by reason of 
     subsection (c)(6), subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) shall be 
     applied by substituting `$6,500' for `$8,000' and `$3,250' 
     for `$4,000'.''.
       (2) Income limitation.--Subsection (b)(2)(A)(i)(II) of 
     section 36 of such Code is amended by striking ``$75,000 
     ($150,000'' and inserting ``$125,000 ($225,000''.
       (d) Limitation on Purchase Price of Residence.--Subsection 
     (b) of section 36 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Limitation based on purchase price.--No credit shall 
     be allowed under subsection (a) for the purchase of any 
     residence if the purchase price of such residence exceeds 
     $800,000.''.
       (e) Waiver of Recapture of First-time Homebuyer Credit for 
     Individuals on Qualified Official Extended Duty.--Paragraph 
     (4) of section 36(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) Special rule for members of the armed forces, etc.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of the disposition of a 
     principal residence by an individual (or a cessation referred 
     to in paragraph (2)) after December 31, 2008, in connection 
     with Government orders received by such individual, or such 
     individual's spouse, for qualified official extended duty 
     service--

       ``(I) paragraph (2) and subsection (d)(2) shall not apply 
     to such disposition (or cessation), and
       ``(II) if such residence was acquired before January 1, 
     2009, paragraph (1) shall not apply to the taxable year in 
     which such disposition (or cessation) occurs or any 
     subsequent taxable year.

       ``(ii) Qualified official extended duty service.--For 
     purposes of this section, the term `qualified official 
     extended duty service' means service on qualified official 
     extended duty as--

       ``(I) a member of the uniformed services,
       ``(II) a member of the Foreign Service of the United 
     States, or
       ``(III) an employee of the intelligence community.

       ``(iii) Definitions.--Any term used in this subparagraph 
     which is also used in paragraph (9) of section 121(d) shall 
     have the same meaning as when used in such paragraph.''.
       (f) Extension of First-time Homebuyer Credit for 
     Individuals on Qualified Official Extended Duty Outside the 
     United States.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (h) of section 36 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by subsection (a), 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Special rule for individuals on qualified official 
     extended duty outside the united states.--In the case of any 
     individual who serves on qualified official extended duty 
     service (as defined in section 121(d)(9)(C)(i)) outside the 
     United States for at least 90 days during the period 
     beginning after December 31, 2008, and ending before May 1, 
     2010, and, if married, such individual's spouse--
       ``(A) paragraphs (1) and (2) shall each be applied by 
     substituting `May 1, 2011' for `May 1, 2010', and
       ``(B) paragraph (2) shall be applied by substituting `July 
     1, 2011' for `July 1, 2010'.''.
       (g) Dependents Ineligible for Credit.--Subsection (d) of 
     section 36 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (1), by striking the 
     period at the end of paragraph (2) and inserting ``, or'', 
     and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) a deduction under section 151 with respect to such 
     taxpayer is allowable to another taxpayer for such taxable 
     year.''.
       (h) IRS Mathematical Error Authority.--Paragraph (2) of 
     section 6213(g) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (M),
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (N) 
     and inserting ``, and'', and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (N) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(O) an omission of any increase required under section 
     36(f) with respect to the recapture of a credit allowed under 
     section 36.''.
       (i) Coordination With First-time Homebuyer Credit for 
     District of Columbia.--Paragraph (4) of section 1400C(e) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``and before December 1, 2009,''.
       (j) Effective Dates.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by subsections (b), 
     (c), (d), and (g) shall apply to residences purchased after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Extensions.--The amendments made by subsections (a), 
     (f), and (i) shall apply to residences purchased after 
     November 30, 2009.
       (3) Waiver of recapture.--The amendment made by subsection 
     (e) shall apply to dispositions and cessations after December 
     31, 2008.
       (4) Mathematical error authority.--The amendments made by 
     subsection (h) shall apply to returns for taxable years 
     ending on or after April 9, 2008.

     SEC. 12. PROVISIONS TO ENHANCE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
                   FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYER TAX CREDIT.

       (a) Age Limitation.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (b) of section 36 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by this Act, is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4) Age limitation.--No credit shall be allowed under 
     subsection (a) with respect to the purchase of any residence 
     unless the taxpayer has attained age 18 as of the date of 
     such purchase. In the case of any taxpayer who is married 
     (within the meaning of section 7703), the taxpayer shall be 
     treated as meeting the age requirement of the preceding 
     sentence if the taxpayer or the taxpayer's spouse meets such 
     age requirement.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Subsection (g) of section 36 of 
     such Code, as amended by this Act, is amended by inserting 
     ``(b)(4),'' before ``(c)''.
       (b) Documentation Requirement.--Subsection (d) of section 
     36 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by this 
     Act, is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph 
     (2), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (3) and 
     inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(4) the taxpayer fails to attach to the return of tax for 
     such taxable year a properly executed copy of the settlement 
     statement used to complete such purchase.''.
       (c) Restriction on Married Individual Acquiring Residence 
     From Family of Spouse.--Clause (i) of section 36(c)(3)(A) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting 
     ``(or, if married, such individual's spouse)'' after ``person 
     acquiring such property''.
       (d) Certain Errors With Respect to the First-time Homebuyer 
     Tax Credit Treated as Mathematical or Clerical Errors.--
     Paragraph (2) of section 6213(g) the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986, as amended by this Act, is amended by striking ``and'' 
     at the end of subparagraph (N), by striking the period at the 
     end of subparagraph (O) and inserting ``, and'', and by 
     inserting after subparagraph (O) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(P) an entry on a return claiming the credit under 
     section 36 if--
       ``(i) the Secretary obtains information from the person 
     issuing the TIN of the taxpayer that indicates that the 
     taxpayer does not meet the age requirement of section 
     36(b)(4),
       ``(ii) information provided to the Secretary by the 
     taxpayer on an income tax return for at least one of the 2 
     preceding taxable years is inconsistent with eligibility for 
     such credit, or
       ``(iii) the taxpayer fails to attach to the return the form 
     described in section 36(d)(4).''.
       (e) Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply 
     to purchases after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Documentation requirement.--The amendments made by 
     subsection (b) shall apply to returns for taxable years 
     ending after the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (3) Treatment as mathematical and clerical errors.--The 
     amendments made by subsection (d) shall apply to returns for 
     taxable years ending on or after April 9, 2008.

     SEC. 13. 5-YEAR CARRYBACK OF OPERATING LOSSES.

       (a) In General.--Subparagraph (H) of section 172(b)(1) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(H) Carryback for 2008 or 2009 net operating losses.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of an applicable net 
     operating loss with respect to which the taxpayer has elected 
     the application of this subparagraph--

       ``(I) subparagraph (A)(i) shall be applied by substituting 
     any whole number elected by the taxpayer which is more than 2 
     and less than 6 for `2',
       ``(II) subparagraph (E)(ii) shall be applied by 
     substituting the whole number which is one less than the 
     whole number substituted under subclause (I) for `2', and
       ``(III) subparagraph (F) shall not apply.

       ``(ii) Applicable net operating loss.--For purposes of this 
     subparagraph, the term `applicable net operating loss' means 
     the taxpayer's

[[Page 26922]]

     net operating loss for a taxable year ending after December 
     31, 2007, and beginning before January 1, 2010.
       ``(iii) Election.--

       ``(I) In general.--Any election under this subparagraph may 
     be made only with respect to 1 taxable year.
       ``(II) Procedure.--Any election under this subparagraph 
     shall be made in such manner as may be prescribed by the 
     Secretary, and shall be made by the due date (including 
     extension of time) for filing the return for the taxpayer's 
     last taxable year beginning in 2009. Any such election, once 
     made, shall be irrevocable.

       ``(iv) Limitation on amount of loss carryback to 5th 
     preceding taxable year.--

       ``(I) In general.--The amount of any net operating loss 
     which may be carried back to the 5th taxable year preceding 
     the taxable year of such loss under clause (i) shall not 
     exceed 50 percent of the taxpayer's taxable income (computed 
     without regard to the net operating loss for the loss year or 
     any taxable year thereafter) for such preceding taxable year.
       ``(II) Carrybacks and carryovers to other taxable years.--
     Appropriate adjustments in the application of the second 
     sentence of paragraph (2) shall be made to take into account 
     the limitation of subclause (I).
       ``(III) Exception for 2008 elections by small businesses.--
     Subclause (I) shall not apply to any loss of an eligible 
     small business with respect to any election made under this 
     subparagraph as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Worker, Homeownership, and Business 
     Assistance Act of 2009.

       ``(v) Special rules for small business.--

       ``(I) In general.--In the case of an eligible small 
     business which made or makes an election under this 
     subparagraph as in effect on the day before the date of the 
     enactment of the Worker, Homeownership, and Business 
     Assistance Act of 2009, clause (iii)(I) shall be applied by 
     substituting `2 taxable years' for `1 taxable year'.
       ``(II) Eligible small business.--For purposes of this 
     subparagraph, the term `eligible small business' has the 
     meaning given such term by subparagraph (F)(iii), except that 
     in applying such subparagraph, section 448(c) shall be 
     applied by substituting `$15,000,000' for `$5,000,000' each 
     place it appears.''.

       (b) Alternative Tax Net Operating Loss Deduction.--
     Subclause (I) of section 56(d)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:

       ``(I) the amount of such deduction attributable to an 
     applicable net operating loss with respect to which an 
     election is made under section 172(b)(1)(H), or''.

       (c) Loss From Operations of Life Insurance Companies.--
     Subsection (b) of section 810 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Carryback for 2008 or 2009 losses.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of an applicable loss from 
     operations with respect to which the taxpayer has elected the 
     application of this paragraph, paragraph (1)(A) shall be 
     applied by substituting any whole number elected by the 
     taxpayer which is more than 3 and less than 6 for `3'.
       ``(B) Applicable loss from operations.--For purposes of 
     this paragraph, the term `applicable loss from operations' 
     means the taxpayer's loss from operations for a taxable year 
     ending after December 31, 2007, and beginning before January 
     1, 2010.
       ``(C) Election.--
       ``(i) In general.--Any election under this paragraph may be 
     made only with respect to 1 taxable year.
       ``(ii) Procedure.--Any election under this paragraph shall 
     be made in such manner as may be prescribed by the Secretary, 
     and shall be made by the due date (including extension of 
     time) for filing the return for the taxpayer's last taxable 
     year beginning in 2009. Any such election, once made, shall 
     be irrevocable.
       ``(D) Limitation on amount of loss carryback to 5th 
     preceding taxable year.--
       ``(i) In general.--The amount of any loss from operations 
     which may be carried back to the 5th taxable year preceding 
     the taxable year of such loss under subparagraph (A) shall 
     not exceed 50 percent of the taxpayer's taxable income 
     (computed without regard to the loss from operations for the 
     loss year or any taxable year thereafter) for such preceding 
     taxable year.
       ``(ii) Carrybacks and carryovers to other taxable years.--
     Appropriate adjustments in the application of the second 
     sentence of paragraph (2) shall be made to take into account 
     the limitation of clause (i).''.
       (d) Anti-abuse Rules.--The Secretary of the Treasury or the 
     Secretary's designee shall prescribe such rules as are 
     necessary to prevent the abuse of the purposes of the 
     amendments made by this section, including anti-stuffing 
     rules, anti-churning rules (including rules relating to sale-
     leasebacks), and rules similar to the rules under section 
     1091 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 relating to losses 
     from wash sales.
       (e) Effective Dates.--
       (1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     subsection, the amendments made by this section shall apply 
     to net operating losses arising in taxable years ending after 
     December 31, 2007.
       (2) Alternative tax net operating loss deduction.--The 
     amendment made by subsection (b) shall apply to taxable years 
     ending after December 31, 2002.
       (3) Loss from operations of life insurance companies.--The 
     amendment made by subsection (d) shall apply to losses from 
     operations arising in taxable years ending after December 31, 
     2007.
       (4) Transitional rule.--In the case of any net operating 
     loss (or, in the case of a life insurance company, any loss 
     from operations) for a taxable year ending before the date of 
     the enactment of this Act--
       (A) any election made under section 172(b)(3) or 810(b)(3) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect to such 
     loss may (notwithstanding such section) be revoked before the 
     due date (including extension of time) for filing the return 
     for the taxpayer's last taxable year beginning in 2009, and
       (B) any application under section 6411(a) of such Code with 
     respect to such loss shall be treated as timely filed if 
     filed before such due date.
       (f) Exception for TARP Recipients.--The amendments made by 
     this section shall not apply to--
       (1) any taxpayer if--
       (A) the Federal Government acquired before the date of the 
     enactment of this Act an equity interest in the taxpayer 
     pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008,
       (B) the Federal Government acquired before such date of 
     enactment any warrant (or other right) to acquire any equity 
     interest with respect to the taxpayer pursuant to the 
     Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, or
       (C) such taxpayer receives after such date of enactment 
     funds from the Federal Government in exchange for an interest 
     described in subparagraph (A) or (B) pursuant to a program 
     established under title I of division A of the Emergency 
     Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (unless such taxpayer is a 
     financial institution (as defined in section 3 of such Act) 
     and the funds are received pursuant to a program established 
     by the Secretary of the Treasury for the stated purpose of 
     increasing the availability of credit to small businesses 
     using funding made available under such Act), or
       (2) the Federal National Mortgage Association and the 
     Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, and
       (3) any taxpayer which at any time in 2008 or 2009 was or 
     is a member of the same affiliated group (as defined in 
     section 1504 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, determined 
     without regard to subsection (b) thereof) as a taxpayer 
     described in paragraph (1) or (2).

     SEC. 14. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME OF QUALIFIED MILITARY 
                   BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE FRINGE.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (n) of section 132 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (1) by striking ``this subsection) to 
     offset the adverse effects on housing values as a result of a 
     military base realignment or closure'' and inserting ``the 
     American Recovery and Reinvestment Tax Act of 2009)'', and
       (2) in subparagraph (2) by striking ``clause (1) of''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this act shall 
     apply to payments made after February 17, 2009.

     SEC. 15. DELAY IN APPLICATION OF WORLDWIDE ALLOCATION OF 
                   INTEREST.

       (a) In General.--Paragraphs (5)(D) and (6) of section 
     864(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are each amended 
     by striking ``December 31, 2010'' and inserting ``December 
     31, 2017''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 864(f) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking paragraph (7).
       (c) Effective Dates.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2010.

     SEC. 16. INCREASE IN PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO FILE A 
                   PARTNERSHIP OR S CORPORATION RETURN.

       (a) In General.--Sections 6698(b)(1) and 6699(b)(1) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are each amended by striking 
     ``$89'' and inserting ``$195''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to returns for taxable years beginning after 
     December 31, 2009.

     SEC. 17. CERTAIN TAX RETURN PREPARERS REQUIRED TO FILE 
                   RETURNS ELECTRONICALLY.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (e) of section 6011 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Special rule for tax return preparers.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall require than any 
     individual income tax return prepared by a tax return 
     preparer be filed on magnetic media if--
       ``(i) such return is filed by such tax return preparer, and
       ``(ii) such tax return preparer is a specified tax return 
     preparer for the calendar year during which such return is 
     filed.
       ``(B) Specified tax return preparer.--For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the term `specified tax return preparer' means, 
     with respect to any calendar year, any tax return preparer 
     unless such preparer reasonably expects to file 10 or fewer 
     individual income tax returns during such calendar year.
       ``(C) Individual income tax return.--For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the term `individual income tax return' means any 
     return of the tax imposed by subtitle A on individuals, 
     estates, or trusts.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (1) of section 6011(e) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking 
     ``The Secretary may not'' and inserting ``Except as provided 
     in paragraph (3), the Secretary may not''.

[[Page 26923]]

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to returns filed after December 31, 2010.

     SEC. 18. TIME FOR PAYMENT OF CORPORATE ESTIMATED TAXES.

       The percentage under paragraph (1) of section 202(b) of the 
     Corporate Estimated Tax Shift Act of 2009 in effect on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act is increased by 33.0 
     percentage points.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New 
York (Mr. Rangel) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady) each will 
control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I ask that all Members have 5 legislative 
days to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material 
in the Record.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, along with the Ways and Means Committee 
ranking member, Mr. Camp, we asked the nonpartisan Joint Committee on 
Taxation to make available to the public a technical explanation of the 
bill. The technical explanation expresses the committee's understanding 
and legislative intent behind this very important piece of legislation. 
It is available on the Joint Committee's Web site at www.jct.gov and is 
listed under the document No. JCX-44-09.
  Over 6 weeks ago, the House sent legislation in a bipartisan way to 
the Senate to extend unemployment insurance for workers who live in 
high unemployment districts, high unemployment States, that have 
already used all of the tiers of the benefits available under current 
law. Since that time, hundreds of thousands of workers have lost or 
gone without unemployment compensation.
  This committee, with the leadership and working together in a 
bipartisan way, sent to the Senate a bill which allowed an additional 
14 weeks of unemployment benefits in every State and a total of 20 
weeks in high unemployment States. Our committees worked hard together 
in order to soften the blow that so many hundreds of thousands of 
people have felt.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to Chairman Jim 
McDermott, who, over his lifetime, has spent so much time in trying to 
improve the quality of lives of those that have suffered economic 
deficits in this great country of ours, and with the permission from 
the Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control that 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of key parts of this legislation.
  The bill before us today offers long-term unemployment workers in all 
States 14 weeks of additional unemployment benefits and provides 20 
additional weeks of benefits in high unemployment States. In all, with 
the passage of this bill, a record total of up to 99 weeks of Federal 
and State unemployment benefits will be paid in a total of 29 States 
and territories where the unemployment rate is 8.5 percent or greater. 
In the State of Texas, where the unemployment rate is 8.2 percent, it 
would provide an additional 14 weeks of unemployment benefits for the 
long-term unemployed who continue to struggle to find a new job.
  In addition, the bill we are considering today includes a number of 
important tax relief provisions that will help families, businesses, 
and our economy as a whole. This bill will extend the $8,000 homebuyer 
tax credit, which is currently scheduled to expire just a few short 
weeks from now, until the middle of next year. It will also create a 
new $6,500 tax credit that will help current homeowners who have lived 
in their homes for at least 5 years to move up into new homes. And 
especially with Veterans Day coming up next week, I'm pleased this bill 
includes a number of homeownership provisions that would specifically 
benefit the brave men and women who serve in our Armed Forces.
  Taken all together, this bill's homeownership tax relief provisions 
will provide a much-needed boost to our struggling housing market and 
our broader economy by helping to soak up the excess housing inventory 
that we see in so many parts of our country. Estimates show that there 
may be up to 3 million renters who are currently financially well 
qualified to buy a median-priced home. Timely help to bolster the 
housing market is essential.
  Another important component is the expanded net operating loss 
provision, which will provide an immediate cash infusion to struggling 
businesses, large and small, all across the Nation. By giving 
businesses that are currently in loss positions the opportunity to 
claim refunds on taxes they paid when they were profitable, we can help 
employers make crucial new investments in our economy and, most 
importantly, free up additional payroll to help get more Americans back 
to work. That's the goal that all of us on both sides of the aisle 
should share. And I'm pleased to support the 5-year net operating loss 
carryback included in this legislation.
  But this is not the end of the process. There is much more work to be 
done. Before the end of the year, the House is expected to consider 
legislation to extend the current Federal extended unemployment benefit 
program possibly through all of next year. This would cost $80 billion 
or more and simply add to the enormous deficits and equally enormous 
State tax hikes on jobs this system is amassing.
  All of this begs the question: Where are the jobs? While long-term 
unemployed workers appreciate the additional help, what they really 
want is a good job. Yet for all the massive spending and debt we've 
incurred this year in the name of stimulating the economy, job creation 
is one thing this administration and congressional Democrats have 
failed to deliver. Unfortunately, that's why we are here today. These 
policies and stimulus have failed.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1245

  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  We've waited for 6 weeks for the Senate to dither around on this 
bill. The decisions made in it could have been made in a week if they 
really were thinking about the half million people who have lost their 
benefits over the last 6 weeks. Since the House acted, that's happened. 
There have been no jobs, no benefits, and no hope. Now, today, we can 
restore that by the bill that's before us, and also perhaps give them 
some hope that this won't happen in the future.
  This legislation returned from the Senate will provide an additional 
14 weeks of unemployment benefits in every State and a total of 20 
weeks in high unemployment States. I welcome the additional weeks in 
the bill compared to the legislation we sent over. It seems the least 
we can do after we've made them wait for 6 weeks. However, I heard 
concerns that the complexity of the Senate amendment may present some 
administrative challenges for State government, so I hope every State 
is actively planning on how to deliver these benefits in the quickest 
possible time frame. This is a wake-up call to State unemployment 
insurance programs.
  I would ask my colleagues to keep in mind that Congress must act 
again before the end of this year to continue the extended unemployment 
benefits that we are now improving.
  The cost of this extension of unemployment benefits is completely 
offset by an 18-month continuation of a tax called the FUTA surtax, 
which has been in place for over 30 years. In addition to helping 
unemployed workers, this bill now includes the extension and expansion 
of two other relief provisions. One helps and encourages those buying 
homes and another helps struggling businesses.
  Mr. Speaker, our Nation has lost 8 million jobs since the great 
recession

[[Page 26924]]

started in December of 2007. Even as we see signs of economic recovery, 
such as last week's announcement that the GDP rose substantially for 
the first time in over a year, we know it will take considerable time 
to restore those lost jobs. There are predictions that it will rise 
above 10 percent nationally and will not come down until late in 2010.
  We must continue to provide the lifeline for the unemployed workers 
who have lost their jobs from no fault of their own and who are 
searching for new employment. Sending this bill to President Obama 
today will accomplish that goal for over 1 million of our fellow 
citizens before the end of the year. Additionally, it would help keep 
families in their homes and prevent foreclosures. This is the right 
thing to do, and we shouldn't have waited so long to do it.
  Mr. STARK. Would the gentleman yield?
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. STARK. I associate myself with the remarks of the distinguished 
chairman and urge adoption.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Linder).
  Mr. LINDER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Six weeks ago, we stood on this floor to discuss a prior version of 
this bill providing extended unemployment benefits. Since then, we have 
gotten additional checkups on jobs and unemployment in the United 
States, and the Democrats' 2009 stimulus plan has received more failing 
grades. Another 263,000 jobs were eliminated in September, and the 
unemployment rate rose to 9.8 percent. More job losses and higher 
unemployment are expected to be announced tomorrow. This and other 
Democrat legislation is perpetuating unemployment, not solving it.
  The Democratic energy policies would increase the price of energy and 
kill millions of jobs. The Democrat health policies would make health 
care and health insurance more expensive and kill millions of jobs. 
Democrats promised a stimulus policy that would keep unemployment from 
exceeding 8 percent. It is now 9.8 percent, soon to reach 10 percent. 
Despite administration claims that 1 million jobs were saved or 
created, nearly 3 million real jobs have been destroyed since the 
stimulus plan was signed into law, and yesterday we found out how they 
count saved jobs.
  Stimulus money went to a south Georgia community organizing group. 
They took all the money and gave raises to their employees and put 
information into the administration that they had saved 980 jobs. They 
have 508 employees. But they gave them raises, and the administration 
has a formula for how you can call that a job saved.
  Like those job losses, the bill before us has only grown. In all, 
this legislation would now make available a record 99 weeks of 
unemployment benefits in more than half of the United States, but what 
it doesn't make available are jobs. Americans are rightly asking, Where 
are the jobs? Our colleagues on the other side have no answers, other 
than to spend more, tax more, and borrow more. That is not good enough.
  But the good news is that we can start to turn this around. For 
starters, we could not raise taxes on jobs, as this legislation does. 
It raises taxes on jobs by $2.4 billion in the coming 18 months, 
hitting every employee in America, and that's to pay for benefits paid 
out generally in the next 2 months. How does raising taxes create jobs? 
It won't. And this bill isn't the end. Far from it.
  Before this year is out, we will be back on this floor passing yet 
another extension of Federal unemployment benefits, only the next bill 
will be so massive--possibly costing $80 billion--even Democrats won't 
be able to stomach the tax hikes to pay for it. So we will borrow that 
money, adding to the $100 billion in unemployment benefit spending 
already scheduled to be piled onto our debt by the end of this year. 
How will that create jobs? It won't.
  Mr. Speaker, we can and must do better. It is well past time for us 
to shelve Democratic job-killing tax hike agendas. We will then unleash 
America's job creation engine so that laid-off workers can once again 
earn paychecks, not unemployment checks. That effort can start with not 
raising taxes on jobs and by offering unemployed workers real help in 
finding new work instead of just more benefit checks. Sadly, this bill 
does none of that. How then will it create jobs? It won't.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  Mr. LEVIN. This bill combines equity and growth. Equity for the 
unemployed, people who are looking for work. The estimate is that 1.3 
million will exhaust their benefits by the end of the year. This is a 
response. There are six people looking for every job. The Michigan 
Unemployment Office has been swamped with phone calls. Today, one of 
the staff there told my office: These are the unemployed. They call 
asking, When is Congress going to pass this extension? What are they 
waiting for? Don't they understand we are desperate?
  As to growth, there are two provisions here. I am surprised that the 
previous speaker says nothing is being done to create jobs when we have 
two provisions here that are aimed to do that. The homeowners' tax 
credit is extended and is also expanded, and the net operating loss 
provision is inserted here to create jobs. This is a bill that combines 
equity and, hopefully--and I think it will--create jobs.
  So let's vote for it without equivocation and, if I might say, 
without debating other issues like health care. We'll debate those 
tomorrow and Saturday.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana 
(Mr. Burton).
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  One of the things that has been a real drag on the economy, Mr. 
Speaker, has been the housing industry, and the tax credit that we've 
given first-time homebuyers, according to the Realtors and the 
homebuilders with whom I've talked, has been a real plus. That is one 
of the few things that we've done around here that has helped the 
economy and helped create some jobs.
  Now, in this bill, we're not only extending the first-time homebuyer 
credit, which I think is going to help the economy, but we're also 
going to say to people that already own homes, we're going to give you 
a $6,500 tax credit if you choose to move up and buy another house. 
That's been one of the shortcomings that we've had over the last few 
months, because people that want to get another home feel like with the 
economy being the way it is right now, they don't want to move. But if 
you encourage them with a $6,500 tax credit--a tax credit. We like tax 
cuts and tax credits. If we give them a $6,500 tax credit, I guarantee 
you there is going to be a lot of people that will move up into more 
homes, newer homes, and it will really help economic growth in this 
country.
  So I just want to congratulate the sponsors, even on the Democrat 
side, for putting this in the bill. I really think this is a plus. I 
don't compliment my colleagues too much over there, but the $8,000 tax 
credit that is being extended for first-time homebuyers is good, and 
the $6,500 tax credit for people that are going to buy a home, a second 
home or a third home, as they get rid of their first one, I really 
think this is going to be a plus for the economy. So even though I 
disagree with my colleagues 95 percent of the time, this is one time 
they have put something good in a bill.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I would remind the gentleman from 
Indiana, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
  I am now going to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Lewis).
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of 
this legislation. I want to thank my good friend, the chairman, Mr. 
McDermott, for his hard work in bringing this bill to the floor.
  Under this bill, a Georgian would receive an additional 20 weeks of 
unemployment benefits. Many have been

[[Page 26925]]

waiting, worrying, and juggling bills for months. People from all over 
the State of Georgia call my offices every day asking what is taking 
Congress so long to act. Let me be clear, these are not people who want 
a handout. These are people who want to work. Many are older workers 
with all levels of education who have worked in the same jobs for 
years, and now their jobs are gone, just gone.
  We can act today, and we must act. Now is the time to act to pass 
this legislation, send it to the President, and let him sign it into 
law so our citizens will receive the necessary benefits.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, may I ask how much time remains?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 12\1/2\ 
minutes remaining, and the gentleman from Texas has 12 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Thank you.
  I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Thank you.
  Mr. Speaker, last week we saw that 5.8 million Americans were 
collecting unemployment benefits at the end of October. I want to 
remind my friends on both sides of the aisle that in the first quarter 
of this year, we saw a loss of 691,000. The stimulus went into effect--
partially, anyway--after we passed it in February with no votes from 
the other side, and in the third quarter of this year, we're at a loss 
of 256,000. That's a gain of 435,000 jobs. You compare that to the last 
year, the last 4 years of the former administration, and I think that 
the stimulus has been a great help.
  This Congress is working hard to get people back on their feet. For 
this reason, it is imperative that, today, we pass the Unemployment 
Compensation Extension Act.
  I am proud to say that we've also extended the homebuyer assistance 
through the first-time homebuyer tax credit while putting in place new 
and significant fraud protection. I think that's important. It came out 
in Mr. Lewis' hearings, and we've done something about that.
  I applaud Chairman Lewis for convening a hearing through the Ways and 
Means Oversight Subcommittee on the first-time homebuyer tax credit, 
which brought light to some of the abuses that were plaguing this 
important credit. The American people need to know that this Congress 
is working to remedy the insufficient regulation and oversight that has 
plagued our Nation for too long.
  I urge all my colleagues on both sides to take swift and decisive 
action to pass this legislation.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I understand Chairman McDermott has additional 
speakers, so I will reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman 
from Nevada (Ms. Berkley).
  Ms. BERKLEY. I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 3548. This 
proposal would extend unemployment benefits by 20 weeks for workers in 
States with high unemployment, like Nevada. This would serve as a 
lifeline, aiding those still struggling to find work in Las Vegas and 
other parts of Nevada. The once recession-proof economy of my district 
of Las Vegas has not been spared from the effects of this downturn. 
Quite the contrary. Nevada has been hard-hit, and almost harder hit 
than any other State by the foreclosure crisis, and currently our 
unemployment rate has skyrocketed to over 13 percent, second highest in 
the Nation.

                              {time}  1300

  Additionally, this bill includes important tax provisions, extending 
and expanding the homebuyer tax credit and allowing businesses to 
carryback losses in 2008 or 2009 for 5 years. The extended homebuyer 
credit will allow more people to purchase a home in my district and 
help stop the continued downward spiral in housing prices caused by the 
foreclosure crisis. The net operating loss provision will help keep 
businesses afloat during the tough times, preventing further layoffs.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I continue to reserve my time.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. This bill represents a textbook example of how not to 
deal with the economic challenges that our country faces. While 
previously approved by the House solely to address the needs of the 
unemployed in economically depressed areas at a cost of a little more 
than a billion dollars, the Senate has taken the good work of Chairman 
McDermott, delayed it, not responded promptly, and has now mushroomed 
the cost to $24 billion.
  Economists have advised us that every dollar we invest to help the 
unemployed spurs economic growth (GDP) by $1.61, very effective, a real 
winner, what the House did originally. But the corporate giveaway that 
the Senate added to this bill--the so-called ``loss carry-back 
provision''--yields, according to the same economists, 19 cents for 
every dollar of revenue that we invest--a real loser.
  Today's bill allocates $2 billion to the winner and $10 billion to 
the loser.
  Understand that this bill now directs the Treasury to essentially 
write a check directly to corporations for more than $10 billion; 
checks to corporations that have committed fraud, checks to 
corporations that have no ability to create jobs because they have no 
employees and exist solely on paper as a fiction. It rewards some of 
the very corporate losers who have brought us to the brink of economic 
ruin.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield the gentleman an additional 15 seconds.
  Mr. DOGGETT. If this is such a great idea, why don't we first apply 
loss carry-back to workers who have lost their jobs and give them back 
some of the taxes that they paid when they had a job? That would 
certainly be more stimulative.
  As we move forward next month to extending benefits for next year, it 
will be much more costly. We should use this lesson as a reminder that 
good policy to address jobs and the needs of the unemployed should not 
be burdened with windfalls to those with good lobbyists.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  While there are serious disagreements about what direction to go on 
the economy, there is bipartisan support for the provisions to help 
people try to buy that first home or to move up into that next one, and 
there is bipartisan support across the aisle strongly in this Congress 
to help small businesses survive this recession, not just small 
businesses but medium-sized businesses and larger businesses. The truth 
of the matter is, a job is a job. And if we can help companies weather 
this storm, if we can help them keep workers on the payroll, if we can 
help them sort of balance out their tax payments over these years, 
allow them to be in a position to recover and grow when this economy 
finally does grow, I think that that tax relief, targeted to those who 
can most create jobs, is extremely helpful.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to Joe Courtney, the 
gentleman from Connecticut.
  Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Speaker, last fall, 2008, this country got a lesson 
in how central the housing market is to the American economy. When 
housing prices started to fall, the financial markets soon followed, 
and we are today now in the deepest recession since the Great 
Depression.
  In the stimulus bill last February, we included a first-time 
homebuyer tax credit, which by all accounts has been a smashing success 
in terms of increasing home sales and stabilizing housing prices. The 
market, though, needs a little bit more time to nurture, and that is 
why, as has been said earlier, there is strong bipartisan support for 
extending this tax credit.
  I, along with Congressman Calvert from California, put together a 
letter with 165 signatures in support of extending the tax credit. I 
salute the chairman and all the leadership who worked hard on a 
bipartisan basis to

[[Page 26926]]

make sure that we are going to continue to grow the real estate market. 
That's how we got into this recession and that's how we are going to 
get out of it.
  I urge strong support for the measure.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the majority leader, 
the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer).
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman from Washington, and I rise in 
support of this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, a year ago this week Barack Obama was elected President 
in the midst of the greatest economic crisis in almost three-quarters 
of a century. Since his inauguration and the swearing in of the 111th 
Congress, we have been working hard to turn our economy around and put 
America and Americans back to work.
  And whether we are Democrats or Republicans, there is reason for hope 
in the results we have seen in that time, because they mean growing 
economic security for the people we represent. We're not there, we need 
to keep working on it, but we've made progress.
  Last month, we saw news that the American economy grew at a rate of 
3.5 percent between July and September. That, Mr. Speaker, is the best 
growth in 2 years and a reversal of four quarters of decline. That's 
progress. It is not yet success.
  According to Moody's, the Congressional Budget Office and the Council 
of Economic Advisors, the Recovery Act has saved or created about 1 
million jobs. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities recently 
concluded that the Recovery Act kept 6 million Americans from falling 
into poverty and reduced the severity of poverty for 33 million 
Americans. It was the right thing to do. But we're not there yet. Facts 
like these have combined to convince unbiased observers that the 
recession the President inherited is over.
  Yet that is not the whole picture. For millions of American families 
struggling with unemployment, the recession is not over. It's not over 
until their loved ones get back to work, until they have a job, until 
they can pay for the housing and the food and the clothing and the 
schooling their families need.
  So we in Congress cannot consider the work of recovery done until 
those jobs are back. The truth is that long-term unemployment remains 
at its highest rate since we began measuring it in 1948. Over 33 
percent of the total unemployed have been out of work for more than 26 
weeks.
  And because it's harder to get hired the longer you've been out of 
the workforce, long-term unemployment can become a vicious cycle. This 
bill lends a hand to nearly 2 million Americans whose unemployment 
insurance is set to run out by the end of the year. It extends their 
unemployment insurance by up to 14 weeks, and by a further 6 weeks in 
the States with the most difficult job markets. This means they will be 
able to survive; not thrive, but survive.
  Who are those 2 million Americans and who will benefit? Many of them 
are middle-class Americans who lost their jobs without warning. 
According to a survey recently conducted at the Rutgers University, 
``Six in 10 of those whose employer had let them go had no advance 
warning.'' What a wrenching experience that was, for them, for their 
spouses, for their children and, yes, for their entire extended 
families, as well as their communities.
  Adding to the pain for many, nearly four in 10 said they had been 
employed by their company for more than 3 years and one in 10 more than 
a decade. These were people with stable jobs and commitments based upon 
those stable jobs, such as college payments and mortgages. People have 
found the ground falling out from under them through no fault of their 
own. We owe it to them, Mr. Speaker, and their families to help, and we 
owe it to our economic health as well.
  The money provided by unemployment insurance quickly goes to 
necessities and boosts local economies. In fact, according to the CBO, 
every dollar we spend on unemployment insurance generates $1.61 in 
local economic activity, making this bill an investment that pays off 
for all of us, so we have a win-win situation here. We help people in 
very bad straits; and we help our economy and help us all. I am also 
glad that this bill is fiscally sound. It's fully paid for. It does not 
contribute to the deficit.
  Though we have made progress since the depths of last winter and the 
depths of the recession inherited by President Obama and this Congress, 
there is, as I have said, clearly more work to do. We pledge to 
continue that work. We can take action today for those families for 
whom recovery is not yet a reality, and I urge my colleagues to support 
this legislation.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana 
(Mr. Burton).
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I have great respect for the majority leader. I just want to correct 
a couple of things that he said.
  He said this is the worst economy in the last three-quarters of a 
century, and I would like to bring to his attention that in the Jimmy 
Carter administration we had 12 percent unemployment, which is worse 
than now. We had 14 percent inflation. When Ronald Reagan came in, Mr. 
Volcker had to raise the interest rates, or did raise the interest 
rates, to 21.5 percent. What happened was the economy took another huge 
nosedive because of the terrible inflation and economic problems that 
were created during the Carter administration, which was not three-
quarters of a century ago; it was just a mere 20-some years ago.
  The other thing I would like to say is that while we are doing the 
right thing by passing this bill, and I complimented my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle for the extension of the home building 
credit for first-time homebuyers and adding to it the tax credit for 
second-time homebuyers--and I think those are great steps in the right 
direction, and I will support this bill--the things that they are doing 
on the other side of the aisle with the stimulus bill, $1 trillion, 
with the health care bill that they are going to try to ram through 
here Saturday that's going to cost $1 to $3 trillion that we don't 
have, when there is a better way to do that, really troubles me.
  I would hope my colleagues would start thinking about what Ronald 
Reagan did because the deficits were so high and inflation was so high, 
and that is cut taxes. When you cut taxes, you stimulate economic 
growth and you sell more products and people go back to work. That 
creates economic expansion.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, may I have the time remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 4\3/4\ 
minutes remaining and the gentleman from Texas has 9 minutes remaining.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. I yield 1 minute to the Speaker of the House, the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Pelosi).
  Ms. PELOSI. I thank the gentleman for yielding and thank him for his 
longstanding leadership on this issue that relates to the economic 
well-being of America's families.
  Anytime families gather across America at their dinner table to see 
how they are going to make ends meet or struggle through the loss of a 
job, they know they have a friend in Jim McDermott in the Congress. 
This has been one of his premier issues, and he has served them and 
this Congress and this country excellently in that regard. I thank him 
for bringing this legislation to the floor.
  We passed this bill over a month ago. At long last it is back, but we 
are glad it is back, no matter how long it took. I am pleased to rise 
to support the legislation.
  The bill will mark another step forward to boost our economic growth, 
and it will make a critical investment in our families and our workers.
  This legislation offers a lifeline to out-of-work Americans, to the 
men and women hardest hit by the recession, by extending unemployment 
benefits--you have heard it over and over--by 14 weeks nationwide and 
an extra 6 weeks in States suffering the highest jobless rates. It's a 
smart choice for our Nation's economy. Every dollar spent on

[[Page 26927]]

unemployment benefits generates more than $1.60 in new economic demand. 
It's good for businesses. It's good for workers.
  This money, because it is so needed by these out-of-work families 
will, again, be spent immediately, inject demand into the economy, 
creating jobs, to the tune of $1.60 for every dollar. It's hard to 
think of any other initiative we can name that is as beneficial to job 
creation.

                              {time}  1315

  Its original purpose is fairness to those workers who have paid into 
the insurance system, and now they are getting an insurance benefit. 
But it also has an impact as a stimulant. It means more Americans will 
have access to the support and assistance they need to get back on 
their feet, reenter the workforce, contribute to our economy and 
succeed.
  The bill also places a down payment on the future of our middle class 
because it extends for the first-time homebuyer a tax credit, helping 
more Americans purchase homes and making it is a little easier for 
families to move into a new house and keep a roof over their heads.
  This initiative has already been successful. We have seen the 
positive impact, the steadier foundation in our housing market. Most 
significantly, we have watched new generations of Americans start 
living out their dream of homeownership and economic security.
  The bill also has the net operating loss carryback, which businesses 
tell us is necessary for them to succeed and to hire new people, and 
also to mitigate some of the damage that has been done to the economy 
from past policies.
  Taking action now to turn around our country is our most urgent and 
pressing challenge. It must be our top priority, regardless of party. 
That is why I am so pleased that we are going to have such a strong 
bipartisan vote. Mr. Brady, thank you today.
  The House acted more than a month ago, as I mentioned, to pass the 
bill and help 1.3 million Americans set to lose their unemployment 
benefits by the end of the year. Today, we are proud to see the Senate 
version come back to the floor, to this Chamber. We would have wanted 
it sooner, but here it is.
  The Nation's leaders have a responsibility to give every American the 
opportunity to recover, to thrive, to reap the rewards of our common 
progress and to take part in our prosperity. Today's vote is about a 
never-ending effort to put our economy on the road to recovery, create 
jobs, and establish the building blocks for growth in the long term.
  President Obama has said over and over again, and so eloquently, that 
our success here would be measured only in the progress made by 
America's families as they get back on their feet and as we help them 
address their economic struggles.
  The economic security of America's families is important to them, to 
their children, to their children's future; and it is important to the 
strength of our country. For that reason, I again commend Mr. McDermott 
and Mr. Brady and urge all Members to support this bill.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Neal).
  Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman, and I 
want to offer my strong support for this legislation that is before us 
today and certainly to acknowledge the role that Mr. Rangel and Mr. 
McDermott played and the leadership they offered to us on this 
legislation.
  This bill before us is fully vetted and fully paid for. It is 
bipartisan in nature. I take great satisfaction from the fact that not 
only does it extend unemployment insurance benefits for many families 
that need help in this difficult economy, but the reminder that we all 
ought to embrace, and that is, that in this atmosphere, you are far 
better off as being perceived for being for something than against 
everything.
  This bill extends the first-time homebuyer credit to help our ailing 
housing industry get back from the worst record in our history. I 
support both provisions.
  Finally, the bill provides net operating loss relief for many 
businesses that have been simply hanging on in this country over the 
last year. It is particularly important to retailers. Based on a bill 
that I filed with Representative Tiberi which became the basis for this 
provision, this relief for businesses, big and small, will provide 
quick capital at a time when it is currently impossible to find. I 
think that this is an affirmative position, it ought to be embraced, 
and I thank Mr. McDermott for moving it forward.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I reserve my time.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Etheridge).
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, across this country people are suffering. In my State of 
North Carolina, unemployment has been in double digits for several 
months. Economists tell us that the economy is turning around, but 
folks at home don't feel it yet.
  This bill continues Congress' critical efforts to restore the economy 
and put our people back to work. Fixing the economy and creating jobs 
needs to be our top priority in this economic downturn.
  This bill helps folks who are out of work in two ways. First, it 
extends the safety net of unemployment insurance to those who are 
struggling the most. This is critical to help people put food on their 
table and keep their lives together until they can find new employment.
  Second, it supports the struggling companies which are trying to 
create jobs. The tax credits in this bill will help restore the health 
of businesses so they can get healthy again, contribute to the growth 
of this economy, and put our people back to work.
  I applaud the Senate for their work in joining these two goals and 
moving it forward. I thank my colleagues for their work and urge my 
colleagues to vote for H.R. 3548.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I reserve my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 1\3/4\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Davis).
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman 
McDermott for yielding. I also want to commend the Senate for its work.
  I simply rise in support of this legislation. It will provide an 
opportunity certainly for individuals who are unemployed to continue to 
receive unemployment compensation, and it will indeed help stimulate 
the economy by allowing individuals credits for the first time if they 
are purchasing a home.
  It is good legislation. I am pleased to support it and urge that all 
Members do so.
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  There is bipartisan support for much of this bill. For all the good 
this bill will do to help people buy their first home, and perhaps move 
up, for all the help it will provide to help businesses survive this 
recession, make no mistake: the unemployment benefits are no substitute 
for a good job, and in that regard, this Congress and this White House 
has failed the American public.
  We were told that the stimulus bill, all $787 billion of it, $1 
trillion with interest, as Christina Romer said, the head of the 
President's economic advisers, would provide an immediate jolt to the 
economy. They promised us that it would keep the unemployment rate 
under 8 percent. They promised it would create jobs in every State in 
the Nation.
  Today, the unemployment rate is not 8 percent. It is 9.8 percent and 
rising, for the numbers we will hear tomorrow, to 9.9 percent in all 
likelihood. Forty-nine of 50 States have lost jobs.
  The two areas of manufacturing and construction, where we were 
promised the greatest rate of job creation, have actually seen the 
greatest rate of job

[[Page 26928]]

loss. In fact, nearly 3 million jobs have been lost since the stimulus 
took effect.
  We are not simply in, as the White House would say, a jobless 
recovery. We are in a ``job loss'' recovery. We continue to shed 
hundreds of thousands of workers every month, 175,000 in the past 
month; and unfortunately, the stimulus has lost all credibility as to 
job creation.
  We hear each day reports of wildly exaggerated jobs claims. The 
Associated Press did a revealing story that shows that in some cases 
contractors exaggerated their job numbers by 10 times. In other cases 
they counted the same job four times. In many cases the money didn't 
come from the stimulus at all.
  This morning, a Dallas Morning News investigation showed that in 
Texas, one out of every four jobs related to education was a part-time 
summer job. In one community, an organization claimed 450 jobs were 
created with stimulus money of $26,000. In one case, again, the money 
didn't even come from stimulus money. And in Beaumont, they are paying 
for child care for people out of stimulus dollars.
  Unfortunately, the claim that the stimulus has created millions of 
new jobs, created or saved them, simply isn't backed up. And, in fact, 
the majority of economists today say it has had little impact on the 
stimulus, and a second stimulus down the road isn't needed or, in fact, 
will be damaging.
  I think what is critical, too, is a lot of businesses are holding off 
creating those new jobs, especially small businesses, because of 
Washington. They watch what we are doing and considering on health 
care. It will drive up their premiums. Cap-and-trade will drive up 
their energy costs. New energy taxes will offshore American energy 
jobs. They look at new financial regulations, tax increases on 
everything from income to capital to dividends to international 
investment, and they are saying we are not going to create jobs. They 
are not going to risk jobs in this environment.
  It is hard enough to predict the market itself, much less to predict 
the market and Congress together. And when they look at the bill that 
this Congress will vote on this weekend on health care, they see tax 
increases on small businesses that will cost us about 4 million jobs, 
mandates on small businesses that will force their workers out of their 
own health care system, and a job trap that actually punishes small 
businesses. When they hire between 11 and 25 workers, actually in this 
bill Congress punishes them, and punishes them more if they raise the 
wages of those workers.
  So, there is a lot more that needs to be done on the economy. This 
bill is no substitute for a good job. It is a step forward in housing 
and for business retention. For that, there is bipartisan support, and 
I do appreciate Chairman McDermott's work on trying to bring a bill 
forward to this floor that many can support.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Washington has 45 seconds 
remaining.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate Mr. Brady's work on bringing 
this bill to the floor, but I would say that in 1935 there was no 
unemployment insurance, there was no welfare, there were no jobs, and 
the Federal Government stepped in and acted to change all of that.
  Now, we clearly need to stimulate the economy; and if we don't 
stimulate the economy, we will continue to have businesses sitting back 
waiting forever and watching their health care costs go out of sight.
  The bill tomorrow on health care is really to help businesses get 
control over one cost item in their budget, and in my view, that is the 
kind of thing we should be doing to help create more jobs. If we sit 
here, we can build this bridge of unemployment insurance, but it is a 
bridge to nowhere if the economy does not start to turn around, and 
that means dealing with the things that are destroying this economy.
  The health care costs of every single business are rising totally out 
of control, and you can't expect them to invest if we haven't done 
something about getting control of health care costs.
  So this is only one part of the issue. We have many other issues we 
are going to have to deal with on the floor, but I am grateful today 
for your help in passing this piece of it.
  Ms. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the 
Senate amendments to H.R. 3548, the ``Unemployment Compensation 
Extension Act of 2009,'' because they will provide much-needed relief 
to the millions of unemployed American workers who are struggling to 
find jobs today and to others who are working to buy their first home.
  With the passage of this bill, Congress will provide up to 14 
additional weeks of desperately needed unemployment benefits to workers 
who are about to exhaust their unemployment benefits, directing much-
needed help to the unemployed who live in states where unemployment 
rates are highest.
  California has the 4th highest unemployment rate in the Nation and in 
terms of my district the numbers are staggering:
  Carson--12.6 percent
  Compton--20.9 percent
  Long Beach--13.7 percent
  Signal Hill--9.4 percent
  Mr. Speaker, although job losses have begun to decline more recently, 
unemployment is still too high, and the American people need relief 
now. With the national unemployment rate at 9.7 percent, we must act 
now. Over 1 million people will exhaust their benefits by the end of 
December if we do not act.
  In addition to providing relief to the unemployed, H.R. 3548 will 
help stimulate the economy. Extending unemployment benefits is one of 
the most cost-effective and fast-acting ways to stimulate the economy 
because the money is spent quickly. Every $1 spent on unemployment 
benefits generates $1.63 in new economic activity.
  The new Senate amendments to this bill will do even more to breathe 
life into our economy. With the inclusion of these amendments, this 
crucial legislation will strengthen our domestic housing market by 
extending the $8,000 first-time homebuyer tax credit through April, 
2010. These amendments will also expand eligibility for the homebuyer 
credit so more families qualify. Specifically, the bill will establish 
a $6,500 tax credit for families that have lived in their current home 
for five or more consecutive years and who are looking to purchase and 
move into a new home. By expanding the tax credit to include more than 
just first-time homebuyers, this bill will further stimulate the 
economy and help us to continue to fully recover from the recession.
  I strongly support these amendments because, for many people in my 
district, the extended and expanded tax credit will allow them to 
realize the American Dream of owning a home. If passed, this bill will 
also provide housing tax relief for military families that have 
sacrificed so much to defend our great nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this necessary and 
timely legislation because it provides relief to unemployed Americans 
when they need it the most and it extends and expands the first-time 
homebuyer tax credit. If we do not pass this bill, we will not only 
face a financial crisis but a moral deficit in this country as well. We 
cannot allow that to happen. I urge all members to vote ``aye'' on the 
Senate amendments to H.R. 3548, the Unemployment Compensation Extension 
Act of 2009.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this 
bipartisan legislation to extend unemployment insurance benefits, 
extend and expand the homebuyer tax credit, and provide needed 
liquidity to businesses struggling to stay afloat in this difficult 
economy.
  Millions of Americans remain unemployed through no fault of their own 
and are struggling to make ends meet. If Congress and the President had 
not taken action with the Recovery Act, millions more would be 
unemployed. We now know that the Recovery Act has saved or created at 
least 640,000 jobs across the country and 6,700 jobs in Maryland.
  We are seeing signs of economic recovery and progress. The housing 
and stock markets are rebounding and the gross domestic product 
increased for the first time last month. To help sustain the rebound in 
the housing market, I am pleased that the bill will extend the first-
time homebuyer tax credit as well as expand the credit to those 
homeowners who have been in their current residence for at least the 
last five years. Additionally, this legislation will provide needed 
liquidity to cash-strapped businesses by giving companies a one-time 
opportunity to carry back their operating losses for five years in 
order to further support our economic recovery.
  Mr. Speaker, much work remains to be done. Protecting the middle 
class, rebuilding

[[Page 26929]]

our economy, and providing job growth remains our top priority. I urge 
my colleagues to support this much-needed legislation.
  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
3548, which extends unemployment benefits to scores of Americans who 
are out of work due to the severe downturn in the economy. The bill 
will also continue to extend the First Time Home Buyer Tax Credit 
though April 30, 2010.
  The $8,000 First Time Home Buyer Tax Credit program has allowed 
approximately 350,000 hard working Americans to achieve the dream of 
home ownership this year. Given that this nation is still struggling, 
providing American families with an $8,000 homebuyer tax credit will 
stabilize the housing market and stimulate the economy. The bill will 
also provide a $6,500 homebuyer credit to current homeowners who 
purchase another home.
  Furthermore, providing an extension of the First Time Home Buyer Tax 
Credit will also help further encourage job growth at a time when it is 
desperately needed. With the purchase of a home, other jobs are created 
in various sectors. This includes construction, plumbing, home 
appliances, and numerous other jobs that are the result of expanding 
affordable housing. There is also evidence that suggests that 
neighborhoods are safer and become more stable when there are high 
rates of home ownership in the community.
  This legislation also extends unemployment benefits to millions of 
Americans who otherwise would lose much needed and deserved benefits. 
In this sluggish economy, American workers are finding it more 
difficult to find good jobs and this benefit will fill this gap.
  This bill could not be any timelier. It extends a provision that 
allows states with high unemployment, like Michigan, to provide a total 
of twenty weeks of extended benefits.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe today's legislation will further help the 
workers of Michigan through these difficult times. I rise in strong 
support of H.R. 3548 and urge my colleagues to support today's 
legislation.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, Oregon has one of the highest 
unemployment rates in the country at 11.5%, which means that hundreds 
of thousands of Oregonians are without work. In the Portland region, 
roughly 140,000 residents are out of work.
  The average weekly unemployment insurance benefit in Oregon is $310. 
Each week, I receive letters indicating how much of a lifeline these 
unemployment benefits are. Unfortunately, many families are nearing the 
end of these benefits.
  Today, I voted to provide stability to American families hit hardest 
by the recession by extending unemployment benefits. The legislation 
will provide families with at least 14 weeks of additional benefits, 
and six more weeks to those living in the 27 states with the highest 
unemployment rates--states including Oregon. This means over 11,000 
Oregonians will retain their insurance for an additional 20 weeks.
  Also, this bill does not add to the deficit. Rather, it is paid for 
by extending a federal unemployment tax that has been in place for more 
than 30 years.
  It is important to recognize that the losses from unemployment will 
last long after these workers--and the millions like them around the 
country--have again found work. Income losses for workers who are let 
go in a recession can persist for as long as two decades, and in some 
cases longer.
  The economic crisis gripping the United States is one of the greatest 
economic challenges that the country has faced. It can be squarely 
traced to the ideology of economic deregulation, leaving the government 
with few tools to address the reckless actions of many financial 
institutions until it was too late.
  It is time to rebuild the foundations of our economy and improve our 
fiscal fitness. I look forward to working with my colleagues to create 
a nation where every family is safe, healthy, and economically secure.
  Ms. BORDALLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3548, the 
Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009. The bill 
contains an important provision extending and expanding the successful 
First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit to homes purchased through April 30, 
2010. Under current law, the tax credit would expire on December 1, 
2009, and would not apply to homes closed on or after that date. The 
extension allows for homebuyers to claim the credit if they enter into 
a binding contract before May 1, 2010 and close within 60 days of that 
date. In addition to the extension of the First-Time Homebuyer Tax 
Credit worth up to $8,000, the legislation expands the credit to 
homebuyers who have been in their current residence for at least the 
past five years. The expanded credit is worth up to $6,500.
  There is strong evidence that suggests this program has greatly aided 
in stabilizing our nation's housing market, and it has also helped to 
improve Guam's housing market. The extension of the First-Time 
Homebuyer Tax Credit will allow this program to complete its designed 
purpose and provide a longer term stimulus to the recovering, but still 
lagging housing market. This legislation further expands the tax credit 
to current homeowners who have been in their homes for at least five 
years but wish to move to a new residence. This expansion will provide 
an additional incentive for responsible homeowners to participate in 
this program. The tax credit will further stimulate the housing market 
to a point where more potential buyers will enter the market, in turn 
helping to stabilize and eventually increase housing prices. The 
passage of this legislation marks an important step toward the full 
recovery of our nation's housing market and our economy overall.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Senate Amendment 
to H.R. 3548. This bill combines vital assistance to unemployed 
Americans and includes measures to help get our economy back on track.
  Despite some significant indicators that our economy is beginning to 
recover, far too many people are looking for work. In my state of North 
Carolina, unemployment has risen to 10.8 percent, with many counties 
experiencing rates above 15 percent. This bill will extend unemployment 
insurance to provide critical assistance for these Americans who are 
struggling the most. Unemployment insurance would be extended for 14 
additional weeks, with an extra six weeks for states like North 
Carolina with unemployment levels over 8.5 percent.
  Other provisions in this bill are critical to creating new job 
opportunities and helping millions of Americans keep the jobs they 
have. This bill would extend the First-Time Homebuyers Tax Credit 
through the end of April 2010 and create a new credit of $6,500 for 
homeowners who have lived in their current residence for at least five 
years. The housing industry has been hit hard during this recession, 
and creating an incentive for homebuyers to rejoin the market can 
lessen the drag that this is creating on the economy as a whole. The 
extended homebuyer tax credit not only helps put American families in 
new homes, but it benefits our flagging housing industry and the 
millions of jobs throughout this sector whether it is real estate, 
construction, or the building supply chain.
  As a Member of the House Committee on Ways and Means, I am also proud 
that this bill expands the carryback of net operating losses that was 
included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Net 
Operating Loss provisions in this bill will help many businesses offset 
past losses and reduce their tax liability. Many American businesses 
are continuing to struggle in the face of our sluggish economy. The 
Five-Year Carryback of Net Operating Losses results in more capital for 
these businesses, allowing them to get healthy, contribute to the 
growth of our economy, and create more jobs.
  I applaud the Senate for sending this timely bill back to the House 
for a vote, as we move forward on growing our economy and creating jobs 
for Americans. I support the Senate amendment to H.R. 3548, and I urge 
my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of it.
  Mr. CAPUANO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 
3548, the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009. 
There are currently millions of workers who are looking for a job, but 
through no fault of their own are unable to find employment. This bill 
would extend emergency unemployment for an additional 20 weeks in high 
unemployment States like Massachusetts. In Massachusetts alone, the 
National Employment Law Center estimates that 39,530 workers would be 
exhausting their benefits if not for the additional assistance created 
by this bill. I cosponsored this extension, and have been a strong 
supporter of extended unemployment compensation during economic 
recessions so that those most directly affected by these difficult 
times are not left to fend for themselves.
  I also support extending the temporary homebuyer tax credit, which 
will help more Americans purchase homes. Congress first passed this 
provision in July 2008 by creating a refundable tax credit for first-
time homebuyers. The credit served as an interest-free loan. In 
February, Congress extended the duration of the credit and also waived 
the repayment requirement. I supported the homebuyer tax credit on both 
occasions.
  H.R. 3548 includes a provision to extend the homebuyer tax credit for 
5 additional months and to raise the income cap so more families are 
eligible. In addition, the measure would provide a $6,500 tax credit 
for current homeowners buying a new residence who consecutively live in 
their home for 5 years. I am a proud supporter of this reasonable 
extension of the homebuyer tax credit.

[[Page 26930]]

  I urge my colleagues to pass this bill quickly and clear it for the 
President.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Worker, 
Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009, H.R. 3548. This 
emergency extension of unemployment benefits for states with high rates 
of unemployment is important for my home state of New Jersey and I urge 
this body to pass this legislation and the President to sign it 
expeditiously.
  With over 15 million Americans currently out of work it is essential 
that this body take action to preserve jobs by helping companies that 
are struggling in these uncertain economic times. More and more 
companies are falling into the position where their losses exceed their 
income. Businesses are being forced to close their doors, lay off 
employees and cut operating costs.
  As American employers continue to struggle to stay afloat in the 
worst economic crisis since the 1930s, Congress must fully utilize the 
tax code to provide timely and targeted relief for American 
entrepreneurs. Current tax law allows ``net operating loss carrybacks'' 
to help companies recoup their losses by offsetting taxable income from 
the two previous tax years. In the American Recovery and Reinvestment 
Act Congress extended the period that small businesses could write off 
their net operating losses for 2008 and 2009 from two years to five 
years; enacting H.R. 3548 will extend to this all companies that have 
suffered losses during this recession.
  Extending the net operating loss provision will help businesses free 
up funds and prevent further job loss, which is critical for our 
economic security. This bill will provide essential tax relief that 
gives owners and entrepreneurs better means to make payroll and invest 
in new equipment, put people back to work, and create new jobs when 
they can.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the emergency 
extension of unemployment benefit passed yesterday for States with high 
rates of unemployment like my home state of New Jersey. Today's passage 
of the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 is 
the final step before it is presented to President Obama for his 
signature.
  As I said in September when we first considered this measure, I hear 
all the time from central New Jersey residents who are working hard 
each day to find a new job. Recently, a Mercer County resident wrote me 
to say his wife had been out of work for 11 months. He wrote to say, 
``The jobs are just not available for her to go back to work.'' This 
bill answers his plea and the pleas of countless other out of work New 
Jersey residents to extend unemployment benefits while they continue to 
search for employment.
  In tough economic times, Congress and the President have worked 
together to extend unemployment benefits when needed. The previous 
extensions of unemployment insurance during this current recession have 
helped many New Jersey residents keep a roof over their head and food 
on the table when times were tough. In this tight job market and with 
the economy just starting to show signs of recovery, there are still 
six unemployed workers for each job opening and more than 5 million 
people who have been unemployed for more than 6 months.
  The Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2009, H.R. 3548, would 
extend by 14 weeks unemployment benefits for individuals who have 
exhausted their current benefits in all States and by an additional 6 
weeks for individuals who live in States with an unemployment rates 
above 8.5 percent.
  Our Government must help those in need as they seek new work. 
Morally, it is the right thing to do and the economists tell us that 
unemployment benefits are one of the most cost-efficient and fast-
acting forms of economic stimulus.
  The bill does not add to the deficit, by off setting its cost with a 
1 year extension of a employment tax that has been in place for 30 
years.
  Once this bill is signed into law it is estimated that the extension 
of unemployment benefits will help more than 1.3 million out of work 
employees.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Rangel) that the House suspend the rules 
and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 3548.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. 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.

                          ____________________