September 19, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H6101 

And, by the way, President Obama 

has called upon this Congress to immediately extend tax relief to 98 percent 

of the American people and 97 percent 

of all businesses that do business passthroughs. What our Republican colleagues want to do is to say to Bain 

Capital and some of the Fortune 100 

companies: You don’t have to pay any 

more to reduce our deficit. And they 

use the language of small business as a 

cover for that. 

Now let’s look at who was among 

those 47 percent of Americans that 

Governor Romney was talking about 

yesterday. Seniors who paid into Medicare, who paid into Social Security, 

who don’t have any Federal income tax 

liability. They’re being under-taxed, 

apparently, or they’re not taking personal responsibility. How about our 

soldiers? We decided that soldiers 

should not be taxed on their combat 

pay. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

time of the gentleman has expired. 

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentleman an 

additional 2 minutes. 

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank the gentleman. 

Soldiers who are fighting in Afghanistan, we decided that they shouldn’t 

have to pay taxes on their combat pay. 

Apparently, Mitt Romney wants them 

to have to pay taxes on that money 

where they’re not taking personal responsibility. Millions of other Americans are working hard every day to 

make ends meet. They may be making 

$25,000, have two kids. And you’re 

right, we have standard deductions and 

we have personal exemptions so that 

people making $25,000 a year don’t get 

hit really hard with income tax. And 

yet those individuals are paying an effective tax rate more than Mitt Romney. 

As the gentleman from Michigan 

pointed out, if you combine the different parts of the payroll tax, they’re 

at 15 percent. Mitt Romney is at 13 percent. And you know what the Buffett 

rule would do, the real one? The real 

one would say for people like Warren 

Buffet and Mitt Romney, they should 

at least pay 30 percent over $2 million. 

There’s a phase-in between $1 million 

and $2 million. That’s what the real 

Buffett rule does. 

And what adds insult to injury is 

that while Mitt Romney and Republicans are proposing a tax plan that 

would give a break for folks at the very 

top, the nonpartisan, independent Tax 

Policy Center says they want to pay 

for that by increasing taxes on middleincome Americans to the effect of 

about $2,000 a year more for an average 

middle class family. Those are people 

on top of the 47 percent who are just 

paying payroll taxes. 

So here we have a proposal by our 

Republican colleagues to provide big 

tax breaks to folks at the very top, and 

they want to come and make a mockery of the real Buffett rule. The real 

Buffett rule would actually generate 

$47 billion. Is that going to solve our 

deficit problem? Of course not. Will it 

contribute to helping it? Yes. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

time of the gentleman has again expired. 

Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentleman an 

additional 1 minute. 

Mr. VAN HOLLEN. That would actually raise some money to help reduce 

the deficit and ask for some shared responsibility. 

This bill is the ‘‘pretty please’’ bill. 

Pretty please, Warren Buffet, pretty 

please, Mitt Romney, won’t you help 

contribute a little bit more toward reducing our deficit? 

b 1640 

I can understand why people like 

Mitt Romney would love this bill because it asks nothing more of them at 

a time when we should be taking a balanced approach to reducing our deficit. 

Just last week, we had a debate here 

about sequester. Everybody agreed, Republicans and Democrats, it would be 

really bad to have these across-theboard cuts take place. Buzz saw cuts. 

Our Republican colleagues and we both 

talked about the negative impact on 

defense, also on the FBI, on border security. 

You know what? We had a proposal 

to pay for part of that to prevent the 

sequester with the Buffett rule and 

some other cuts. Our Republican colleagues talked about the terrible consequences of the cuts, but they just 

don’t want to pay for them. They don’t 

want to ask very wealthy Americans to 

contribute one more penny. 

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I advise my 

colleague that I am prepared to close. 

Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself the remaining time. 

You know, as I’ve heard this debate, 

I’ve been thinking. This is really mislabeled. Why don’t we call it the Mitt 

Romney Rule Act of 2012? He paid the 

return he indicated less than 15 percent. He earned many, many, many 

millions. He knew what the code now 

says. He could have sent some of the 

money that was not taxed to the government. He could even use a credit 

card. But he hasn’t done that. 

This is mislabeled. This has nothing 

to do with Mr. Buffett. 

There’s been some reference here to 

small business. The very nonpartisan 

entities indicate that 97 percent of people who are in small business and beyond have income actually around 

$250,000 or less. 

All this bill does is to indicate what’s 

already in the code. So, there’s nothing 

wrong with the bill. What is wrong is 

this frightful mislabeling to try to 

cover up a refusal of the Republican 

Party in this institution to face up to 

what is really necessary to be done. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time. 

I can understand why my friends on 

the other side are talking about everything but the bill before us. And that’s 

because this administration’s record on 

the deficit is so dismal. We’re going on 

our fourth year of trillion-dollar deficits. The deficit under their watch is 

now $16 trillion. 

You know, what we really need to do 

is grow this economy and create jobs, 

and we know that their tax increases 

that they love so much would cost us 

700,000 jobs. Look at this: 43 months of 

unemployment of 8 percent. That’s why 

they want to talk about everything but 

this. 

They’ve said the question is how to 

reduce the deficit. The fact of the matter is this bill does reduce the deficit, 

according to the Joint Committee on 

Taxation, by $135 million. Now, they 

might not think that’s much, but to 

most Americans, every million dollars 

counts. 

So, I think it’s important that we 

move forward on this, that we grow our 

economy, that we grow our economy to 

create jobs. And we know that taxes on 

small businesses that they propose cost 

us jobs. 

So let’s pass this bill. It’s a step forward. It allows those Americans—we 

all hear it as we go around the country—people say, ‘‘I’d like to give more. 

How do I do it?’’ 

This makes it easier, it makes it 

straightforward, and actually is scored 

as reducing the deficit. 

Let’s vote to make a step for reducing the deficit. We have bigger issues 

we need to deal with. We’re going to 

deal with those. That’s why this committee, Ways and Means, has been focused on tax reform this year, more 

than 20 hearings. I hope we can move 

forward on fundamental tax reform. 

Let’s vote for this bill. Let’s give those 

Americans who want to be more generous, who want to check a box and 

contribute more specifically to deficit 

reduction, a very transparent, straightforward, and easy way to do that. 

With that, I yield back the balance of 

my time. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

question is on the motion offered by 

the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 

CAMP) that the House suspend the rules 

and pass the bill, H.R. 6410. 

The question was taken; and (twothirds being in the affirmative) the 

rules were suspended and the bill was 

passed. 

A motion to reconsider was laid on 

the table. 

f 

ANDREW P. CARPENTER TAX ACT 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. 

Speaker, I move to suspend the rules 

and pass the bill (H.R. 5044) to amend 

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 

exclude from gross income any discharge of indebtedness income on education loans of deceased veterans, as 

amended. 

The Clerk read the title of the bill. 

The text of the bill is as follows: 

H.R. 5044 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of 

Representatives of the United States of America 

in Congress assembled, 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H6102 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 19, 2012 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Andrew P. 

Carpenter Tax Act’’. 

SEC. 2. DISCHARGE OF INDEBTEDNESS INCOME 

ON EDUCATION LOANS OF DECEASED VETERANS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (f) of section 

108 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

amended by adding at the end the following 

new paragraph: 

‘‘(5) DECEASED VETERANS.— 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any student loan described in subparagraph (B) of an 

individual who is a veteran who served on active duty in the Armed Forces of the United 

States and who is deceased as a result of a 

service-connected disability, no amount 

which (but for this paragraph) would otherwise be includible in gross income by reason 

of the discharge (in whole or in part) of such 

loan shall be includible in gross income of 

any cosigner on such loan. 

‘‘(B) STUDENT LOAN DESCRIBED.—For purposes of subparagraph (A), a student loan described in this subparagraph is a loan that— 

‘‘(i) is made, insured, or guaranteed under 

title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, 

or 

‘‘(ii) is a private education loan (as defined 

in section 140(a)(7) of the Truth in Lending 

Act (15 U.S.C. 1650(a)(7))), made by an entity 

(other than an entity described in paragraph 

(2)) to an individual to assist the individual 

in attending an educational organization described in section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii). 

‘‘(C) SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY.—For 

purposes of subparagraph (A), the term ‘service-connected disability’ has the meaning 

given such term by section 101(16) of title 38, 

United States Code.’’. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments 

made by this section shall apply to discharges of indebtedness occurring on or after 

October 7, 2001. 

(c) WAIVER OF LIMITATION FOR CREDITS AND

REFUNDS ATTRIBUTABLE TO THIS ACT.—If the 

credit or refund of any overpayment of tax 

resulting from the application of the amendment made by subsection (a) to a period before the date of enactment of this Act is prevented as of such date by the operation of 

any law or rule of law (including res judicata), such credit or refund may nevertheless 

be allowed or made if the claim therefor is 

filed before the close of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 

Act. 

SEC. 3. ACCOUNTS IN THE THRIFT SAVINGS FUND 

SUBJECT TO CERTAIN FEDERAL TAX 

LEVIES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 8437(e)(3) of title 

5, United States Code, is amended in the first 

sentence— 

(1) by striking ‘‘659)’’ and inserting ‘‘659),’’; 

and 

(2) by striking the period at the end and inserting the following: ‘‘, and shall be subject 

to a Federal tax levy under section 6331 of 

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.’’. 

(b) DISPOSITION OF AMOUNTS.—Any potential revenue gain attributable to the enactment of this Act, as determined by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office— 

(1) shall be deposited in the general fund of 

the Treasury of the United States; and 

(2) shall be used solely for purposes of deficit reduction. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 

Texas (Mr. SAM JOHNSON) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. LEVIN) each 

will control 20 minutes. 

The Chair recognizes the gentleman 

from Texas. 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. 

Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 

may consume. 

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5044, the Andrew 

Carpenter Tax Act, was introduced by 

the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 

DESJARLAIS) in honor of Lance Corporal Andrew Carpenter, who made the 

ultimate sacrifice in defense of this Nation’s freedom while serving in Afghanistan, and I’m a proud cosponsor of the 

bill. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank 

the gentleman from Tennessee for his 

leadership in addressing a tax problem 

facing families of deceased servicemembers who have had their student 

loans forgiven. 

Right now our Tax Code considers 

forgiven student loans cosigned by the 

servicemember’s family as taxable income. This is just wrong for our Nation’s military families, and that’s 

what the gentleman from Tennessee’s 

bill is all about. It would change the 

Tax Code so that the IRS will no longer 

be able to hit families of deceased servicemen and -women with a tax bill on 

the forgiven debt. 

You see, Mr. Speaker, the life of a 

military family is not easy, but it is 

admirable. We must never forget that 

when one member of the family serves, 

all of the family serves. In a small but 

important way, this bill is really about 

protecting our Armed Forces and their 

families, just as they protect our freedom every day. They need to know 

their country is behind them. 

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the 

balance of my time. 

Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself such time 

as I may consume. 

Mr. Speaker, this bill does address an 

issue that needs consideration. Lieutenant Carpenter died serving his Nation. He possessed outstanding student 

loans. The lender waived repayment by 

his parents, who were obligated on the 

loans. Present policy would require his 

parents to pay taxes on the value of 

that repayment. The Congress must 

act to ensure that families of brave 

men and women do not face undue 

hardship in the face of tragedy. 

Unfortunately, this bill has not been 

the subject of a single hearing or markup in the committee of jurisdiction, 

Ways and Means. As a result, this bill 

has no legislative history to which 

agencies or taxpayers can turn to answer any questions that should arise. 

b 1620 

While technical changes were made 

in this bill from the bill’s introduction 

to its consideration on the House floor 

today, the text still leaves many questions unanswered, including deficiencies with respect to definition of 

terms in the bill and as to scope. 

The tax treatment of debt forgiveness is a broad and important issue. 

And while this bill will cover the tax 

treatment of one class of debt for one 

class of taxpayers, I think many in this 

body might believe that other classes 

of taxpayers should be able to receive 

such tax treatment. So, therefore, in 

the absence of regular order on this bill 

but recognizing the need to address the 

impact of our tax laws on those who 

have served our Nation and their families, I believe we should pass this legislation over to the Senate, with the expectation that it will address outstanding technical and coverage issues. 

With that, I reserve the balance of 

my time and ask unanimous consent 

that the balance of my time on this bill 

now be handled by the gentleman from 

Washington (Mr. MCDERMOTT), a member of our committee. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan? 

There was no objection. 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. I now 

yield such time as he may consume to 

the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 

DESJARLAIS), the sponsor of this legislation. 

Mr. DESJARLAIS. Mr. Speaker, before I begin my remarks, I want to 

take a few moments to thank Majority 

Whip KEVIN MCCARTHY, Majority Leader ERIC CANTOR, and Ways and Means 

Chairman DAVID CAMP for their help in 

bringing this worthwhile piece of legislation to the House floor. In addition, I 

want to say a special thanks to Congressman SAM JOHNSON for his work 

and guidance through the process. 

I also want to recognize and thank 

the family of Lance Corporal Andrew 

P. Carpenter for bringing this matter 

to my attention. I am truly humbled to 

have had the honor of introducing the 

Andrew P. Carpenter Tax Act. 

We are all familiar with the verse in 

John that says: ‘‘Greater love hath no 

man than this, that a man lay down his 

life for his friends.’’ On February 19, 

2011, due to wounds suffered while on a 

combat mission in the Helmand province of Afghanistan, Lance Corporal 

Andrew Carpenter did indeed lay down 

his life for his friends and country. 

A graduate of Columbia Central High 

School in 2002, Andrew enlisted in the 

United States Marine Corps in 2007 and 

was assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 8th 

Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division, 

2nd Marine Expeditionary Force out of 

Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. He was 

serving his second tour in Afghanistan. 

Leaving behind a wife, Crissie, and 

soon to be born son, Landon, Andrew 

gave his life in defense of our Nation 

and the cause of freedom. In a fitting 

tribute to his and his family’s sacrifice, 

the city of Columbia, Tennessee, held a 

memorial service that sent a clear 

message that his valor would not be 

forgotten. Unfortunately, the aftermath of this outpouring of support was 

soon tarnished by the grim hand of the 

Internal Revenue Service. As hard as it 

is to believe, Mr. Speaker, the pain and 

anguish of his parents and wife were 

compounded by a tax bill from the Internal Revenue Service for over $1,000 

due to the fact that an educational 

loan from a private institution was forgiven. Imagine the dismay of having to 

bury a son, daughter, husband, or wife 

that had paid the ultimate sacrifice 

only to have the IRS say you haven’t 

paid enough. 

Three years prior, Andrew had taken 

out a private educational loan. After 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
September 19, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H6103 

learning that Andrew had been killed 

in action, the company administering 

the loan agreed to completely forgive 

the debt. However, the IRS did not. 

Upon forgiveness of the debt, the family, who had cosigned the loan, received a 1099C form informing them 

that the debt discharged would be 

factored into their gross taxable income for that year. Not knowing what 

the tax bill was for, the family paid the 

tax and then contacted my office and 

brought this matter to my attention. 

As a newly elected Congressman, this 

was a rude introduction to just how 

broken our Federal system was. 

Mr. Speaker, the legislation before us 

today attempts to shield American 

families from ever having the IRS add 

to their loss by callously presenting 

them with a tax bill. Simply, my bill 

amends the Internal Revenue Code to 

exempt private student loan forgiveness from being categorized as gross 

taxable income for families of veterans 

who have lost their lives while serving 

in active duty in the United States 

Armed Forces. It is important to note 

that this bill would not make it mandatory for private lenders to forgive 

educational loans. Private loan companies would still have the option of 

whether or not to forgive a loan. 

Having lost their son in Afghanistan, 

the Carpenter family is comforted by 

the knowledge that Andrew died a 

hero. His memory lives on in his son, 

Landon. It is for them and all those 

who may have or may face similar 

hardships that I urge that the House 

suspend the rules and pass H.R. 5044. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, I 

yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman 

from Texas (Ms. JACKSON LEE). 

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank 

the subcommittee ranking member on 

the Ways and Means Committee for his 

leadership, and I thank my friend from 

Texas, Congressman JOHNSON, for managing, and the sponsor of this legislation as well. 

Let me rise in support of what I 

think is a recognition, a recognition of 

the sacrifice that families make and 

those who remain behind after our soldiers fall in battle—a fall pursuant to a 

service-related injury—and to not have 

the added burden of having any forgiven debt be included as income to be 

assessed by the IRS. 

I believe that this is a fair and important collaborative exercise, a reasonable response to taxation. I hope, as we 

come together around veterans and 

this removal of this burden, we can 

clearly see pathways to address the 

question of tax reform that responds to 

working Americans, that protects 

working Americans, for that is obviously what this family is. They sent a 

son off to war, or a daughter off to 

war—or a mother or father or uncle or 

aunt, cousins. America is about family. 

Therefore, now we have the legitimate 

response that they would not, through 

some procedural snafu, be burdened by 

having that forgiven debt be part of the 

remaining family’s income, particularly those who may have cosigned. I 

know the fallen soldier would not want 

that to happen. 

As I stand here, I cannot help make 

mention as well of the resolution that 

saluted the fallen in Libya, H. Res. 786. 

I just wanted to acknowledge the passion that all Americans have for Ambassador John Christopher Stevens, 

Foreign Service information management officer Sean Smith, and security 

officers Tyrone S. Woods and Glen A. 

Doherty. 

As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I have often said that 

terrorism is franchised. It does not 

have to be an army of millions or thousands, it does not have to be a battalion, it doesn’t have to be anything 

but one wanting to do evil. Therefore, 

it is important to say to the families of 

these men in particular, and others 

that fell, and others that were injured, 

and the men and women that serve as 

our face—civilian face, if you will—in 

embassies and consulate offices around 

the world, particularly those who have 

served in the horrific backdrop of 9/11 

in a region that is now overwhelmed 

with conflict—to say to their families 

that our priority will be to offer you 

sympathy and to mourn with you and 

to love you and to indicate that we will 

not allow divisiveness to fall on the 

issue of who did it. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

time of the gentlewoman has expired. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. I yield the gentlelady an additional minute. 

Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. What 

we will do is to raise the flag as Americans and evenhandedly and quickly investigate the source of this horrific incident to our family members. We will 

not let their memory be diminished by 

quarreling and squabbling about pointing the finger as much as it will be to 

investigate what actually happened. 

I think it is time now, as we saw occurring just a few days ago with the 

welcoming home of their bodies, that 

America draws together to show that 

we are united around those who have 

fallen in battle and those who have 

served, to express our deepest respect, 

and of course our deepest honor for 

them. 

b 1700 

I will go forth to work harder to ensure that we are protected with secure 

Council offices and embassies and enhanced security for those who are willing to put themselves on the front line. 

I think this is appropriate in conjunction with this present legislation, H.R. 

5044, that helps our fallen veterans as 

well. 

I thank my colleague for yielding the 

time. 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. I reserve the balance of my time. 

Mr. MCDERMOTT. I assume, Mr. 

Speaker, that the majority is prepared 

to close, and I yield myself such time 

as I may consume. 

Mr. Speaker, I don’t think there’s 

anybody on this floor who has any objection to what we’ve tried to do here 

for the Carpenters. 

I think that the question really is: 

Why do we not have regular order in 

the House of Representatives? This bill 

was so hastily drafted that it, the 

original version, did not even cover 

Carpenters, had to be amended so that 

it covered them. Now, that comes because you don’t have hearings. That 

comes because you don’t have witnesses come in and tell people how this 

works. 

We witnessed a rather sad event in 

Libya just the other day. I was a Foreign Service officer, and I felt very 

strongly the feeling of sadness and 

grief when Foreign Service officers 

died. 

Suppose one of them had an outstanding student loan signed for by 

their parents while they went to 

Georgetown school of whatever? 

The fact is that this bill—is that line 

of duty? No. So now we’re taking one 

little narrow class and we’re drawing 

one narrow little bill, when, in fact, 

there are a lot of people who, in the 

line of duty, get killed and debt forgiveness makes sense, as it does for the 

Carpenters and for the families who cosigned the loan. 

When your son or daughter goes off 

to college and you sign a loan with 

them, you don’t expect them to die. 

But you certainly aren’t going to withhold your signature if that’s the only 

way your son or daughter gets an opportunity to pay for college. 

But this bill says that only one line 

of duty service-connected—and it 

doesn’t define ‘‘service-connected’’— 

and it’s only if you’re in the military. 

There are a lot of other people who 

serve in this country, in public service—police officers, firemen, Foreign 

Service officers. 

There are a lot of people who ought 

to have been considered when this bill 

was brought before us. It was not 

brought before the committee, just 

popped out here on the floor as a unanimous consent bill. 

Now, this Congress has been the most 

do-nothing Congress in the history of 

the country—less hearings, less bills— 

but we have had 302 votes in this Congress to reduce regulations on the environment. We found time for every fifth 

vote in the last 2 years to have been to 

reduce regulations protecting the environment. We couldn’t have hearings on 

something like this because we were 

busy doing things like that. We spent 

33 times trying to repeal the Affordable 

Care Act. We simply have not dealt 

with the problems that face this country. 

There’s another issue that ought to 

be before the committee. It’s as important, perhaps, as this issue, perhaps affects more people. That’s the debt forgiveness that comes by the money that 

banks reduce the principal on loans. 

Now, if you have a loan for $300,000 

and you have to refinance it, and you 

go and it’s assessed, your house is now 

only worth 200,000, you’re out of luck. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H6104 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 19, 2012 

Your house is under water. Now, the 

bank can reduce the principal down to 

200,000. They can grant you $100,000 forgiveness. But you know what happens 

to you when that happens? That 100,000 

appears on your doorstep as income in 

the next taxing cycle. 

That provision is in—we have an exemption for that presently, but it’s expiring in January, and we simply have 

not even brought that issue up. There 

are thousands of people out there with 

foreclosures on their homes who are 

being socked or will be socked by debt 

forgiveness by banks. Those are the 

kinds of other issues that should have 

been dealt with. 

Everyone’s going to vote for this bill. 

I suspect that unless the Republicans 

want a vote on it for PR purposes, it’ll 

go without a sound. None of us are 

going to ask for a vote, because it’s obvious that this is one of those places 

where you want to make sure that a 

family who gives their son or their 

daughter does not get socked with a 

debt on top of it. 

I urge my colleagues to vote for this, 

but urge the leadership on the other 

side to think about having hearings 

and reestablishing the regular order in 

the House so that we can answer some 

of the questions that are about this bill 

and think about many of the other 

issues that we have not dealt with. 

We’re within 2 days of the end of this 

Congress, and we’ve got thousands of 

issues. Everybody knows that November and December are going to be terrible because we’re going to be right 

back here trying then to deal, on the 

back of a galloping horse, with a huge 

number of issues that have not been 

dealt with by the shortest Congress, 

the least hearings, the least bills 

passed. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. 

Speaker, I appreciate our guys fighting 

for us. 

GENERAL LEAVE

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. 

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that 

all Members may have 5 legislative 

days in which to revise and extend 

their remarks and include extraneous 

materials on H.R. 5044, as amended, 

currently under consideration. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? 

There was no objection. 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. I urge 

my colleagues to support this bill, and 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

question is on the motion offered by 

the gentleman from Texas (Mr. SAM

JOHNSON) that the House suspend the 

rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5044, as 

amended. 

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. DESJARLAIS. 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, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. 

f 

FEMA REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 

2012 

Mr. DENHAM. Mr. Speaker, I move 

to suspend the rules and pass the bill 

(H.R. 2903) to reauthorize the programs 

and activities of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as amended. 

The Clerk read the title of the bill. 

The text of the bill is as follows: 

H.R. 2903 

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

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This Act may be cited as 

the ‘‘FEMA Reauthorization Act of 2012’’. 

(b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.— 

Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents. 

TITLE I—REAUTHORIZATION OF FEMA 

AND MODERNIZATION OF INTEGRATED 

PUBLIC ALERT AND WARNING SYSTEM 

Sec. 101. Reauthorization of Federal Emergency Management Agency. 

Sec. 102. Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Modernization. 

TITLE II—STAFFORD ACT AND OTHER 

PROGRAMS 

Sec. 201. Reauthorization of urban search 

and rescue response system. 

Sec. 202. Reauthorization of emergency 

management assistance compact grants. 

Sec. 203. Disposal of excess property to assist other disaster survivors. 

Sec. 204. Storage, sale, transfer, and disposal 

of housing units. 

Sec. 205. Other methods of disposal. 

Sec. 206. Establishment of criteria relating 

to administration of hazard 

mitigation assistance by 

States. 

Sec. 207. Review of regulations and policies. 

Sec. 208. Appeals process. 

Sec. 209. Implementation of cost estimating. 

Sec. 210. Tribal requests for a major disaster 

or emergency declaration under 

the Stafford Act. 

Sec. 211. Individual assistance factors. 

Sec. 212. Public assistance pilot program. 

Sec. 213. Public assistance debris removal 

procedures. 

Sec. 214. Use of funds. 

Sec. 215. Reduction of authorization for 

emergency management performance grants. 

Sec. 216. Technical correction. 

Sec. 217. National Dam Safety Program Act 

reauthorization. 

TITLE I—REAUTHORIZATION OF FEMA 

AND MODERNIZATION OF INTEGRATED 

PUBLIC ALERT AND WARNING SYSTEM 

SEC. 101. REAUTHORIZATION OF FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY. 

Section 699 of the Post-Katrina Emergency 

Management Reform Act of 2006 (6 U.S.C. 

811) is amended to read as follows: 

‘‘SEC. 699. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

‘‘There are authorized to be appropriated 

to carry out this title and the amendments 

made by this title for the salaries and expenses of the Agency— 

‘‘(1) for fiscal year 2012, $1,031,378,000, including amounts transferred from grant programs; 

‘‘(2) for fiscal year 2013, $1,031,378,000, including amounts transferred from grant programs; and 

‘‘(3) for fiscal year 2014, $1,031,378,000, including amounts transferred from grant programs.’’. 

SEC. 102. INTEGRATED PUBLIC ALERT AND 

WARNING SYSTEM MODERNIZATION. 

(a) SHORT TITLE.—This section may be 

cited as the ‘‘Integrated Public Alert and 

Warning System Modernization Act of 2012’’. 

(b) INTEGRATED PUBLIC ALERT AND WARNING SYSTEM MODERNIZATION.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—To provide timely and effective disaster warnings under this section, 

the President, acting through the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, shall— 

(A) modernize the integrated public alert 

and warning system of the United States (in 

this section referred to as the ‘‘public alert 

and warning system’’) to ensure that the 

President under all conditions is able to 

alert and warn governmental authorities and 

the civilian population in areas endangered 

by disasters; and 

(B) implement the public alert and warning 

system. 

(2) IMPLEMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.—In 

carrying out paragraph (1), the Administrator shall, consistent with the recommendations in the final report of the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System Advisory Committee (established under subsection (c))— 

(A) establish or adopt, as appropriate, common alerting and warning protocols, standards, terminology, and operating procedures 

for the public alert and warning system; 

(B) include in the public alert and warning 

system the capability to adapt the distribution and content of communications on the 

basis of geographic location, risks, or personal user preferences, as appropriate; 

(C) include in the public alert and warning 

system the capability to alert and warn, and 

provide the equivalent amount of information to individuals with disabilities and individuals with access and functional needs; 

(D) ensure that training, tests, and exercises are conducted for the public alert and 

warning system and that the system is incorporated into other training and exercise 

programs of the Department of Homeland 

Security, as appropriate; 

(E) establish and integrate into the National Incident Management System a comprehensive and periodic training program to 

instruct and educate Federal, State, Tribal, 

and local government officials in the use of 

the Common Alerting Protocol enabled 

Emergency Alert System; 

(F) conduct, at least once every 3 years, 

periodic nationwide tests of the public alert 

and warning system; and 

(G) ensure that the public alert and warning system is resilient, secure, and can withstand acts of terrorism and other external 

attacks. 

(3) SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS.—The public 

alert and warning system shall— 

(A) incorporate multiple communications 

technologies; 

(B) be designed to adapt to, and incorporate, future technologies for communicating directly with the public; 

(C) to the extent technically feasible, be 

designed to provide alerts to the largest portion of the affected population, including 

nonresident visitors and tourists and individuals with disabilities and access and functional needs, and improve the ability of remote areas to receive alerts; 

(D) promote local and regional public and 

private partnerships to enhance community 

preparedness and response; 

(E) provide redundant alert mechanisms if 

practicable so as to reach the greatest number of people regardless of whether they have 

access to, or utilize, any specific medium of 

communication or any particular device; and 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE