[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 4900-4903]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




      BAN ON IRS BONUSES UNTIL SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY DEVELOPS 
                COMPREHENSIVE CUSTOMER SERVICE STRATEGY

  The Committee resumed its sitting.

                              {time}  1030

  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, just in response to my friend from the Keystone State, 
the implementation of the Affordable Care Act is not an IRS slush fund. 
There are mandates within the Affordable Care Act which necessitate, 
obviously, the involvement of the IRS agency. So any attempts to make 
it or create a slush fund in people's minds is totally, totally 
inaccurate.
  That is not the issue. The issue is we have cut $5 billion. This year 
we restored $290 million. Again, do the math. We have 13,000 less 
employees. So that means a lot of those 13,000 less employees came to 
the end, perhaps, of their career, but were never replaced. It had 
nothing to do with the budget. It was beyond the budget, even, or 
within the budget.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, I have no other speakers at this time, and 
I reserve the balance of my time.

[[Page 4901]]


  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Seven former IRS Commissioners wrote, and we need to take a look at 
it because obviously they weren't all Democrats and they weren't all 
Republicans, but seven former IRS Commissioners have said: ``Over the 
last 50 years, none of us has ever witnessed anything like what has 
happened to the IRS appropriations over the last 5 years and impact 
these appropriations reductions are having on our tax system.''
  The percentage of callers able to reach a live person at the IRS in 
the 2015 filing season was just 43 percent. The average wait time was 
28 minutes. At one point during the filing season, the Taxpayer 
Protection Program line, which answers calls for victims of identity 
theft--a growing issue day by day--was not answering 90 percent of the 
calls.
  That is not acceptable to your side. It is certainly not acceptable 
to our side, but your solution is, by no means, the solution. If you 
were truly concerned about improving customer service at the IRS, you 
would fully fund the agency. And we would support that. Penalizing the 
IRS is misguided and, in the long run, the consequence hurts the 
taxpayer.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Kelly of Mississippi). Members are again 
reminded to direct their remarks to the Chair.
  Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  In closing, I want to once again actually appreciate the comments 
that were made by the other side in the entirety of this debate because 
they really speak to, in essence, what they are trying to do.
  And I start again with this effectively unfunded mandate that was put 
on the IRS by the other side. They talk about funding. They gave them 
$1.7 billion of responsibility under the Affordable Care Act, but never 
a penny to pay for it. As my parents used to say when I was a kid: You 
should have thought about that when you did it.
  Where was the recognition that these responsibilities that you are 
putting on them, you have got to pay for them?
  We have seen costs rise exponentially in so many different factors, 
but that is the essence of what is being done here. So we are not going 
to pay for it, but let's create tension and anxiety at the one place 
where the taxpayers will uprise, because we will stop talking to them. 
That is the essence of what is being done here.
  Mr. Chairman, once again, we are not asking for anything radical in 
response. In fact, we have already responded quite appropriately by 
putting $290 million more into the very issue that is at stake here.
  All we are saying is: Come up with a plan. Show us how you are going 
to do it. Show us how, when 48 million people call you and ask for help 
with their taxes at a time when they don't have 34 minutes to wait on a 
phone, to be one of the lucky 30 percent that even get their phone call 
answered. Do what a number of other agencies already do, give us a plan 
on how you are going to improve that.
  It is that simple. Our purpose isn't to punish diligent IRS 
employees, but rather to compel management to finally put the taxpayers 
first and take the need to improve the customer service experience 
seriously.
  Upon learning that this legislation was in development, the IRS 
reported to the GAO that they have established a team to consider its 
customer service recommendations. How about that? After 3 years, no 
response.
  The IRS Commissioner himself says service is abysmal. And they say it 
has been satisfactory up to this point in time. But as soon as this 
legislation is introduced, we have customer service recommendations and 
a team being established. I don't think that is a coincidence. Passing 
the bill into law will ensure that the process continues in good faith.
  Mr. Chairman, Congress has a duty to oversee the IRS and ensure that 
it is meeting the needs of American taxpayers. When the IRS fails to 
meet those needs, it is up to Congress to act.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  In lieu of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by 
the Committee on Ways and Means, printed in the bill, it shall be in 
order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment 
under the 5-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute 
consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 114-49. That amendment 
in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read.
  The text of the amendment in the nature of a substitute is as 
follows:

                               H.R. 4890

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

     SECTION 1. BAN ON IRS BONUSES UNTIL IRS
                   DEVELOPS COMPREHENSIVE CUSTOMER SERVICE 
                   STRATEGY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of the Treasury, and the 
     Secretary's delegate, may not pay a bonus, award, or similar 
     cash payment to any employee of the Internal Revenue Service 
     until the Secretary, or the Secretary's delegate, develops 
     and submits to Congress a comprehensive customer service 
     strategy that has been reviewed and approved by the Treasury 
     Inspector General for Tax Administration. Such strategy shall 
     include--
       (1) appropriate telephone and correspondence levels of 
     service, which shall be based on service provided by the best 
     in business and customer expectations;
       (2) a thorough assessment of which services the Internal 
     Revenue Service can shift to self-service options; and
       (3) proposals to improve customer service in the short term 
     (the current and following fiscal year), medium term 
     (approximately three to five fiscal years), and long term 
     (approximately ten fiscal years).
       (b) Progress Reports.--The Secretary of the Treasury, or 
     the Secretary's delegate, shall submit reports to the 
     Congress on the status of its customer service strategy and 
     actions taken to improve customer service. Such reports shall 
     be submitted on a semiannual basis until the comprehensive 
     customer service strategy under subsection (a) is fully 
     implemented.

     SEC. 2. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED.

       No additional funds are authorized to be appropriated or 
     otherwise made available to carry out the requirements of 
     this Act. Such requirements shall be carried out using 
     amounts otherwise authorized to be appropriated or made 
     available.

  The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to that amendment in the nature of a 
substitute shall be in order except those printed in House Report 114-
503. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in 
the report, by a member designated in the report, shall be considered 
read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be 
subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division 
of the question.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Meehan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in House Report 114-503.
  Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Brady), I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 2, line 23, strike ``or made available''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 688, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meehan) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. MEEHAN. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is a technical amendment to 
clarify section 2 of the bill. This section states that no additional 
funds are authorized or otherwise made available to carry out the 
requirement of this bill. The language in the amendment makes it 
abundantly clear that we are not authorizing a new appropriation here.
  The IRS needs to create a customer service agency. If they want to 
claim that they don't have enough money in the budget to be serving the 
taxpayers with an appropriate topnotch customer service strategy, then 
we are saying:

[[Page 4902]]

Give us a plan to do so, and withhold the bonuses until you do so. It 
is very, very simple.
  This amendment makes a technical correction to make our intentions 
here crystal clear. The IRS doesn't need additional funding to make 
customer service the top priority when, in fact, it has already been 
given $290 million to do just this.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, once again, my friends on the other side 
of the aisle are cutting off their nose to spite their face: more 
mandates on the IRS with fewer resources and somehow expecting them to 
improve services.
  As I have said, the IRS is servicing 9 million more people with $1 
billion less. This amendment would only exacerbate that problem. The 
words of the seven former IRS Commissioners ring out here.
  Why don't we just cut congressional office budgets by 17 percent, as 
we did with the IRS, and then mandate that we improve constituent 
services or increase our workloads?
  That doesn't make any sense either.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meehan).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Sanford

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in House Report 114-503.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 2, after line 17, insert the following:
       (c) Consultation With Taxpayer Advocate.--In developing the 
     comprehensive customer service strategy pursuant to this 
     section, the Secretary, or the Secretary's delegate, shall 
     consult with the National Taxpayer Advocate.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 688, the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from South Carolina.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I have a small but, I think, perfecting 
amendment that I think, whether Republican or Democrat, we can agree 
on. Because I think as Republicans and Democrats, we may have different 
perspectives on this equation, but we would agree that money is power 
and that the IRS has an immense amount of power, given the amount of 
money that it is, in essence, steward to and controls as money is moved 
from individuals across this country to the Federal Government.
  I think that we would agree that money without a plan is chaos. That 
is why in the military they have a five-paragraph order. That is why if 
you think about the business rule, you have a business plan. If you 
think about sports, you have got a game plan. You need to go through a 
planning process to effectively use money.
  I think we would agree that the government's role is to serve. I 
think it disturbed a lot of us that the Lincoln Memorial was closed 
back during the government shutdown. Some people saw that as a way of 
maximizing inconvenience for folks, as a way of highlighting some rule 
we agreed or disagreed on as opposed to, again, staying focused on this 
larger notion of service.
  So I applaud the overall work of this bill and what it is about. I 
think that there is a problem when wait times move up threefold over 
the last 5 years. I think that there is a problem with dropped calls 
and infinity holds and all the other things that people have seen come 
their way as a result of dysfunction at the IRS. We might see different 
remedies as to how we get there, but I think we would agree on those 
things.
  And so I applaud what is being done with this notion of saying: Let's 
hold on bonuses. Let's actually come up with a plan as we deal with how 
this additional $20 million is dispensed and used within the IRS.
  This amendment simply says that as you go in consultation with the 
Treasury, as you go in consultation with the IG, let's also include the 
National Taxpayer Advocate there at the IRS. Because I think it is 
important. You may deal with technology experts, you may deal with 
phone call experts, you may deal with taxation specialists, but to keep 
the bull's-eye the ultimate customer out there--and that is the 
taxpayer.
  Too often the taxpayer is indeed the forgotten man or forgotten women 
in this equation. The idea of consulting with the National Taxpayers 
Union as you formulate those plans, again, I think make this a simply 
perfecting amendment, as you listen to the different constituencies 
that will be dealt with in coming up with this plan.
  I think that perspective is key in holding the taxpayers' viewpoint 
to be vital in the creation of this plan. That is all the amendment 
does.
  I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Meehan).

                              {time}  1045

  Mr. MEEHAN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chair, let me just take a moment to say that the National 
Taxpayer Advocate has a long history of not only working on behalf of 
taxpayers, but working with the IRS to improve customer service. I 
think having the National Taxpayer Advocate involved in this process of 
creating comprehensive service strategy will actually improve the final 
outcome.
  I thank the gentleman for taking his time not only to look at the 
totality of this bill, but to find a way to improve its implementation 
with that support.
  I support the addition, and I urge others to vote ``yes'' on the 
amendment.
  Mr. SANFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this 
amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Chairman, so let's get this amendment straight. 
This bill would have the IRS work with the National Taxpayer Advocate, 
in addition to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
as I read it correctly, in coming up with a customer service plan. 
Sounds good.
  However, you forget to mention one thing, Mr. Chairman, because the 
National Taxpayer Advocate and the Treasury Inspector General Tax 
Administrator have publicly stated, for the record, that the severe 
budget cuts enacted by the other side, Mr. Chairman, in Congress have 
forced the IRS to reduce its workforce, reduce training, reduce 
technology, and that these steps have weakened the ability to enforce 
the Nation's tax laws--is that what you are looking for?--and serve 
taxpayers effectively.
  They said it, I didn't. You can't make this stuff up.
  So, instead of forcing the IRS to work with the National Taxpayer 
Advocate, why don't we, in Congress, listen to them, and fund the IRS 
so it can do its job?
  This is the height of misdirection. I am only going by the words you 
have in this amendment. And I will tell you, they have made a statement 
very loud and clear to all of us.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Sanford).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Womack) having assumed the chair, Mr. Kelly of Mississippi, Acting 
Chair of the Committee of the Whole House

[[Page 4903]]

on the state of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had 
under consideration the bill (H.R. 4890) to impose a ban on the payment 
of bonuses to employees of the Internal Revenue Service until the 
Secretary of the Treasury develops and implements a comprehensive 
customer service strategy, and, pursuant to House Resolution 688, he 
reported the bill back to the House with an amendment adopted in the 
Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment 
reported from the Committee of the Whole?
  If not, the question is on the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. PASCRELL. 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, this 15-
minute vote on passage of H.R. 4890 will be followed by a 5-minute vote 
on passage of H.R. 3724.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 260, 
nays 158, not voting 15, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 162]

                               YEAS--260

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Allen
     Amash
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bera
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Cicilline
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Jones
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kirkpatrick
     Kline
     Knight
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Peters
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poe (TX)
     Poliquin
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                               NAYS--158

     Adams
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (FL)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hastings
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takai
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                             NOT VOTING--15

     Amodei
     Beyer
     Crenshaw
     Denham
     Edwards
     Fattah
     Fincher
     Grayson
     Hunter
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Pompeo
     Sewell (AL)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Van Hollen

                              {time}  1110

  Ms. SPEIER, Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois, and Mr. LANGEVIN changed 
their vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. RUPPERSBERGER changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated against:
  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, today, Thursday, April 21, 
2016, I was unable to be present for the first recorded vote of the 
day. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall vote No. 
162 (on passage of H.R. 4890).

                          ____________________