THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents
``(d) QUALIFIED HEALTH INSURANCE CREDIT ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATE.--For purposes of this section, a qualified health insurance credit eligibility certificate is a statement furnished by an individual to a qualified health insurance issuer which--
[Page: S1904] GPO's PDF
``(1) certifies that the individual will be eligible to receive the credit provided by section 35 for the taxable year,
``(2) estimates the amount of such credit for such taxable year, and
``(3) provides such other information as the Secretary may require for purposes of this section.
``(e) QUALIFIED HEALTH INSURANCE CREDIT ADVANCE AMOUNT.--For purposes of this section, the term `qualified health insurance credit advance amount' means, with respect to any qualified health insurance issuer of qualified health insurance, an estimate of the amount of credit allowable under section 35 to the individual for the taxable year which is attributable to the insurance provided to the individual by such issuer.
``(f) REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION FOR RECEIPT OF PAYMENTS OF ADVANCE AMOUNT.--No payment of a qualified health insurance credit advance amount with respect to any eligible individual may be made under subsection (a) unless the health insurance issuer provides to the Secretary--
``(1) the qualified health insurance credit eligibility certificate of such individual, and
``(2) the return relating to such individual under section 6050T.
``(g) REGULATIONS.--The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this section.''.
(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.--The table of sections for chapter 77 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``Sec. 7527. Advance payment of health insurance credit for purchasers of qualified health insurance.''.
(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.--The amendments made by this section shall take effect on January 1, 2001.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues today and be part of the first bipartisan, bicameral group to address the growing number of individuals and families without health insurance coverage in this country.
The problem has been made clear. America's uninsured population continues to rise. Despite the fact that we are enjoying strong economic times, the nation's uninsured population has grown to 44 million over the past decade. We know that the majority of the uninsured--32 of the 44 million--earn an annual income of under $50,000. We also know that the rising cost of health insurance is the single most important reason for not purchasing health care coverage. Many Americans simply cannot afford to buy health insurance.
The solutions are becoming clearer as well. A one-size fits all approach to expand health coverage and access to health care does not meet the various needs of the uninsured population. As a result, our proposal will take a multi-pronged approach that meets the needs of the uninsured and looks at innovative approaches to provide individuals greater ability to purchase coverage. We will seek to build upon the current employer-based system which continues to be the main source of health care coverage for most Americans.
Our goal is to fill the coverage gaps that exist in the current system. A central piece of our proposal is to provide a refundable tax credit for low-income Americans who are not offered a contribution for their insurance through their employer and do not receive coverage through federal programs such as Medicaid or Medicare. The legislation introduced today will help hard working Americans who cannot afford to buy coverage on their own. For example, the part-time worker who is not offered employer-sponsored health insurance will be offered a $1,000 tax credit to purchase health care coverage. The single mother with two children earning less than $50,000 a year, will be offered a $2,000 credit to purchase health insurance.
The legislation introduced today is the first of many steps that we will take to address the varying needs of the uninsured. Over the next several months, we will also explore a variety of options to assist individuals and their families in purchasing health coverage either through existing employer plans, the individual market, or through purchasing pools; seek ways to improve enrollment in existing federal programs, where approximately 5 million adults and 8 million children are eligible for Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP) yet are not enrolled; and finally, as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Public Health, I will work closely with my colleagues to explore ways to expand and sustain our safety net system to improve access to critical primary care services to the uninsured and medically underserved populations.
I especially wish to thank the American Academy of Family Physicians, the American Hospital Association, the American Medical Association, the Americans for Tax Reform, the BlueCross BlueShield Association, the Chamber of Commerce of the USA, the Citizens Against Government Waste, the Galen Institute, the Healthcare Leadership Council, the Health Insurance Association of America, the Hispanic Business Roundtable, the National Center for Policy Analysis, the National Federation of Independent Business, and the Small Business Survival Committee for their support of this important legislation.
By Mr. ROCKEFELLER (for himself and Ms. SNOWE):
S. 2321. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a tax credit for development costs of telecommunications facilities in rural areas; to the Committee on Finance.
RURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2000
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Rural Telecommunications Modernization Act. This Act would create a tax credit for companies that invest in providing broadband telecommunications services available in rural areas. The convergence of computing and communications has changed the way America interacts and does business. Individuals, businesses, schools, libraries, hospitals, and many others, reap the benefits of networked communications more and more each year. However, where in the past access to low bandwidth telephone facilities met our communications needs, today many people and organizations need the ability to transmit and receive large amounts of data quickly--as part of electronic commerce, distance learning, telemedicine, and even for mere access to many web sites.
In some areas of the country companies are building networks that meet this broadband need as fast as they can. Technology companies are fighting to roll out broadband facilities as quickly as they can in urban and suburban areas. They are tearing up streets to instal fiber optics, converting cable TV facilities to broadband telecom applications, developing incredible new DSL technologies that c onvert regular copper telephone wires into broadband powerhouses.
Other areas are not as fortunate. In rural areas access to broadband communications is harder to come by. In fact, there are only a few broadband providers outside big cities and suburban areas nationwide. This is because in many cases rural areas are more expensive to serve. Terrain is difficult. Populations are widely dispersed. Importantly, many of our broadband technologies cannot serve people who live more than eighteen thousand feet from a phone company's central office--which is the case for most rural Americans.
The implications for the country if we allow this broadband disparity to continue are alarming. Organizations in traditional robust communications and computing regions, often located in prosperous urban and suburban communities, will be able to reap the rewards of the so-called ``New Economy.'' Organizations in other areas, often in rural areas, including many areas in my State of West Virginia, will suffer the consequences of being unable to take advantage of the astounding power of broadband networked computing.
Just as companies that employ technological advances are decimating their less technologically savvy competitors, businesses in infrastructure-rich areas may soon decimate competitors in infrastructure-poor areas. This is just as true for rural students and workers trying to gain new skills who are competing against their non-rural peers in the New Economy. The result of this digital divide could be disastrous for rural Americans: job loss, tax revenue loss, brain drain, and business failure concentrated in rural areas.
Denying rural Americans a chance to participate in the New Economy is also bad for the national economy. Businesses will be forced to locate their operations and hire their employees in urban locations that have adequate broadband infrastructure, rather than in rural locations that are otherwise more efficient due to the location of
[Page: S1905] GPO's PDF
Therefore, we must do everything we can to ensure that broadband communications are available to all areas of the country--rural as well as urban. The Rural Telecommunications Modernization Act addresses this problem.
The Rural Telecommunications Modernization Act would give companies the incentive to build broadband facilities in rural areas by using a very focused tax credit. It would offer any company that invests in broadband facilities in rural areas a tax credit over the next three years. This tax credit will help fight the growing disparity in technology I just described.
The credit is only available for certain investments. First, investments must be for ``broadband local access facilities.'' Second, investments must support ``high-speed broadband telecommunications services.'' And third, investments must serve only ``rural counties.''
The Rural Telecommunications Modernization Act is part of the solution to the critically important digital divide problem. Rural Americans deserve the chance to participate in the New Economy. Without access to broadband services they will not have this chance. I hope that the Members of this body will support this important bill.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Rural Telecommunications Modernization Act of 2000.
SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT IN RURAL AREAS.
(a) IN GENERAL.--Section 46(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to amount of investment credit) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (3) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following:
``(4) the rural telecommunications facilities credit.''
(b) AMOUNT OF CREDIT.--Subpart E of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to rules for computing investment credit) is amended by inserting after section 47 the following:
``SEC. 47A. RURAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES CREDIT.
``(a) IN GENERAL.--For purposes of section 46, the rural telecommunications facilities credit for any taxable year is an amount equal to the applicable percentage of the qualified broadband local access facilities expenditures for such taxable year.
``(b) APPLICABLE PERCENTAGE.--For purposes of subsection (a), the applicable percentage in the case of qualified broadband local access facilities expenditures in connection with--
``(1) broadband telecommunications facilities, is 10 percent, and
``(2) enhanced broadband telecommunications facilities, is 15 percent.
``(c) QUALIFIED BROADBAND LOCAL ACCESS FACILITIES EXPENDITURE.--For purposes of this section, the term `qualified broadband local access facilities expenditure' means any expenditure--
``(1) chargeable to capital account--
``(A) for property for which depreciation is allowable under section 168, and
``(B) incurred in connection with broadband telecommunications facilities or enhanced broadband telecommunications facilities serving rural subscribers, and
``(2) incurred during the period--
``(A) beginning with the taxpayer's (or any predecessor's) first taxable year beginning after the date of the enactment of this section, and
``(B) ending with the taxpayer's (or any predecessor's) third taxable year beginning after such date.
``(d) DEFINITIONS AND SPECIAL RULES.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES.--The term `broadband telecommunications facilities' means broadband local access facilities capable of--
``(A) transmitting voice, and
``(B) downloading data at a rate of 1.5 MBPS and uploading data at a rate of .5 MBPS.
``(2) ENHANCED BROADBAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES.--The term `enhanced broadband telecommunications facilities' means the broadband local access facilities capable of--
``(A) transmitting voice, and
``(B) downloading and uploading data at a rate of 10 MBPS.
``(3) DETERMINATION OF BROADBAND LOCAL ACCESS FACILITIES.--Broadband local access facilities--
``(A) begin at the switching point closest to the rural subscriber, which is--
``(i) the subscriber side of the nearest switching facility in the case of local exchange carriers,
``(ii) the subscriber side of the headend or the node in the case of cable television operators, and
``(iii) the subscriber side of the transmission and reception facilities in the case of a wireless or satellite carrier,
``(B) end at the interface between the network and the rural subscriber's location, and
``(C) do not include any switching facility.
``(4) RURAL SUBSCRIBER.--The term `rural subscriber' means a subscriber who lives in area which--
``(A) is not within 10 miles of any incorporated or census designated places containing more than 25,000 people, and
``(B) is not within a county or county equivalent which has an overall population density of more than 500 people per square mile of land.''
(c) SPECIAL RULE FOR MUTUAL OR COOPERATIVE TELEPHONE COMPANIES.--Section 501(c)(12)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to list of exempt organizations) is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (iii), by striking the period at the end of clause (iv) and inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following new clause:
``(v) which is not described in subparagraph (A), in an amount which does not exceed in any year an amount equal to the applicable percentage of the qualified broadband local access facilities expenditures (as determined in section 47A) of the mutual or cooperative telephone company for such year.''
(d) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.--The table of sections for subpart E of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 47 the following:
``Sec. 47A. Rural telecommunications facilities credit.''
(e) EFFECTIVE DATES.--
(1) IN GENERAL.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the amendments made by this section shall apply to expenditures incurred after the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) SPECIAL RULE.--The amendments made by subsection (c) shall apply to amounts received after the date of the enactment of this Act.
By Mr. MCCAIN:
S. 2322. A bill to amend title 37, United States Code, to establish a special subsistence allowance for certain members of the uniformed services who are eligible to receive food stamp assistance, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
REMOVE SERVICEMEMBERS FROM FOOD STAMPS ACT OF 2000
Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill to remove thousands of our servicemembers from the food stamp rolls.
The Remove Servicemembers from Food Stamps Act of 2000 provides junior enlisted servicemembers who are eligible for food stamps in the pay grade E-1 through E-5 an additional allowance of $180 a month. A not-yet-published Department of Defense report estimates that 6,300 servicemembers receive food stamps, while the General Accounting Office and Congressional Research Service place this number at around 13,500. Regardless of this disparity, the fact that just one servicemember is on food stamps is a national disgrace. This bill will end the ``food stamp Army'' once and for all.
This legislative proposal is estimated to cost only $6 million annually. Interestingly, the Congressional Budget Office determined that it would represent an overall savings to taxpayers since it would save the Department of Agriculture more than $6 million by removing servicemembers from the food stamp rolls for good.
Last year, this legislation was included in S. 4, the Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's, and Marines' Relief Act of 1999. Although the Senate approved this legislation as part of S. 4, I was greatly disappointed when food stamp relief was rejected by conferees from the House of Representatives despite the strong support of Admiral Jay Johnson, the Chief of Naval Operations, and General Jim Jones, the Commandant of the Marine Corps. With over 13,500 military families on food stamps, and possibly thousands more eligible for the program, I cannot understand the Congress' refusal to rectify this problem in last year's National Defense Authorization Act.
It is outrageous that Admirals and Generals received a 17 percent pay
[Page: S1906] GPO's PDF
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents