September 13, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S6343 

correct language? My goal, along with 

others at the time, was to relieve family farmers from having their reorganization plans fail because of huge tax 

liabilities to the federal government. 

Justice Breyer noted this in the dissent: ‘‘Congress was concerned about 

the effect on the farmer of collecting 

capital gains tax debts that arose during (and were connected with) the 

Chapter 12 proceedings themselves. . . . The majority does not deny 

the importance of Congress’ objective. 

Rather, it feels compelled to hold that 

Congress put the Amendment in the 

wrong place.’’ Hall v. United States, 132 

S.Ct. 1882, 1897, 2012, Breyer, J., dissenting, internal citations and 

quotations omitted. 

As a result of the Hall case, family 

farmers facing bankruptcy now find 

themselves caught in an unfortunate 

situation. The rules have changed and 

must be corrected in order to provide 

certainty and clarity in the law. The 

Family Farmer Bankruptcy Tax Clarification Act of 2012 will provide the 

clarity needed to help family farmers 

reorganize in bankruptcy. 

This bill strikes the current language 

in the Bankruptcy Code, which the Supreme Court said does not work, 11 

U.S.C. §1222(a)(2)(A) and inserts a new 

11 U.S.C. §1222(a)(5). The new provision 

transforms all government claims arising as a result of the sale or transfer of 

post-petition farm assets into unsecured, non-priority claims, notwithstanding any language in the Internal 

Revenue Code to the contrary. The bill 

also provides new sections for treatment of these claims during the bankruptcy process. The bill recognizes that 

some asset sales may occur post-confirmation. As a result, we also provide 

a mechanism for plan modification as a 

result of these sales, if used for the 

specified purpose of reorganization, to 

assist in reorganization. Finally, we 

make a technical change to 11 U.S.C. 

§1228(a), which practitioners and commentators have long argued is needed. 

This technical change is within the 

limited scope of this clarification bill, 

as it provides greater certainty and 

clarity that has troubled courts and 

practitioners alike. 

I recognize the end of this session of 

Congress is near and the time to do 

something is short. However, we have 

been fine tuning this legislation to ensure it properly corrects the Hall case. 

We will seek to do what we can during 

the remaining Congressional calendar 

to fix the problem this year. Should we 

run out of time, then we will maintain 

our focus on this problem into the next 

year. The Family Farmer Bankruptcy 

Tax Clarification Act of 2012 ensures 

that what Congress sought to do in 2005 

actually occurs. In the wake of the 

Hall decision, clarification is needed to 

help ensure family farmers facing 

bankruptcy will have a chance to reorganize successfully. 

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed 

in the RECORD. 

There being no objection, the text of 

the bill was ordered to be printed in 

the RECORD, as follows: 

S. 3545 

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 ‘‘Family 

Farmer Bankruptcy Tax Clarification Act of 

2012’’. 

SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION OF RULE ALLOWING DISCHARGE TO GOVERNMENTAL 

CLAIMS ARISING FROM THE DISPOSITION OF FARM ASSETS UNDER 

CHAPTER 12 BANKRUPTCIES. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1222(a) of title 11, 

United States Code, is amended— 

(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘unless—’’ 

and all that follows through ‘‘the holder’’ 

and inserting ‘‘unless the holder’’; 

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

the end; 

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period 

at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

(4) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(5) notwithstanding the application of the 

rules under subchapter V of chapter 1 of the 

Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and without 

regard to whether the claim arose before or 

after the filing of the petition, provide for 

the treatment and payment of any unsecured 

claim owed to a governmental unit by the 

debtor or the estate that arises as a result of 

the sale, transfer, exchange, or other disposition of any farm asset used in the debtor’s 

farming operation as an unsecured claim 

that is not entitled to priority under section 

507.’’. 

(b) POSTPETITION CLAIMS RELATING TO

SALE, TRANSFER, EXCHANGE, OR OTHER DISPOSITION OF FARM ASSETS.— 

(1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1222 of title 11, 

United States Code, is amended by adding at 

the end the following: 

‘‘(e)(1) A governmental unit may file a 

proof of claim for a claim described in subsection (a)(5) that arises after the date on 

which the petition is filed. 

‘‘(2)(A) Except as provided in subparagraph 

(B), if a governmental unit has not filed a 

proof of claim under paragraph (1) for a 

claim described in subsection (a)(5), after the 

date that is 120 days after the date on which 

the claim arises, the trustee or the debtor 

may file proof of such claim. 

‘‘(B)(i) For a claim described in subsection 

(a)(5) that is a tax for which a return is due, 

if the debtor or trustee has provided notice 

as described in clause (ii) and the governmental unit has not filed a proof of claim 

under paragraph (1), after the date that is 180 

days after the date on which the debtor or 

trustee provides the notice, the debtor or the 

trustee may file proof of such claim. 

‘‘(ii) Notice as described in this clause is 

notice by the debtor or the trustee— 

‘‘(I) indicating the intent to file the applicable claim; 

‘‘(II) setting forth the amount of the claim; 

‘‘(III) that includes a copy of the filed return relating to the claim; and 

‘‘(IV) that is delivered to the governmental 

unit at the address designated for requests 

made under section 505(b)(1)(A). 

‘‘(3) A claim filed under paragraph (1) or (2) 

shall be allowed or disallowed under section 

502, but shall be determined as of the date 

such claim arises, and shall be allowed under 

section 502(a), (b), or (c) of this title, or disallowed under section 502(d) or 502(e) of this 

title the same as if such claim had arisen before the date of the filing of the petition.’’. 

(2) MODIFICATION OF PLAN AFTER CONFIRMATION.—Section 1229(a) of title 11, United 

States Code, is amended— 

(A) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘or’’ at 

the end; 

(B) in paragraph (3), by striking the period 

at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

(C) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(4) provide for the payment of a claim described in section 1222(a)(5) that arose after 

the date on which the petition is filed.’’. 

(c) TECHNICAL CORRECTION.—Section 1228(a) 

of title 11, United States Code, is amended in 

the matter preceding paragraph (1)— 

(1) by inserting a comma after ‘‘all debts 

provided for by the plan’’; and 

(2) by inserting a comma after ‘‘allowed 

under section 503 of this title’’. 

(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments 

made by this section shall apply to any 

bankruptcy case that— 

(1) is pending on the date of enactment of 

this Act and relating to which an order of 

discharge under section 1228 of title 11, 

United States Code, has not been entered; or 

(2) commences on or after the date of enactment of this Act. 

By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. 

LIEBERMAN, Mr. SANDERS, and 

Mr. BLUMENTHAL): 

S. 3547. A bill to amend the Lacey 

Act Amendments of 1981 to clarify provisions enacted by the Captive Wildlife 

Safety Act, to further the conservation 

of certain wildlife species, and for 

other purposes; to the Committee on 

Environment and Public Works. 

Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I 

am introducing the Big Cats and Public 

Safety Protection Act to protect public 

safety, improve animal welfare, assist 

international big cat conservation, and 

to help clarify the existing patchwork 

of current state regulation. This is a 

companion for legislation previously 

introduced in the House by Representatives HOWARD MCKEON and LORETTA

SANCHEZ. Amazingly, it is unknown 

even how many big cats such as lions, 

cougars, leopards, and cheetahs live or 

are bred in private possession in the 

United States. This bill would prevent 

the private possession and breeding of 

big cats, while still allowing properly 

accredited zoos and wildlife sanctuaries to continue to operate in the 

critical conservation and animal welfare roles that they occupy today. 

Why is this legislation so important? 

First, this is a public safety issue, 

which was made tragically clear almost a year ago in Zanesville, Ohio, 

when the owner of a backyard zoo 

opened the cages of his tigers, leopards, 

lions, wolves, bears, and monkeys before killing himself. Wild animals were 

literally roaming the streets where 

children were playing and people were 

going about their daily lives. Sadly, 

the situation gave police no choice but 

to shoot and kill almost 50 animals, including 38 big cats, before they could 

enter populated areas. Public safety officials were, understandably, not 

trained or equipped to deal with large 

exotic animals especially 300 pound tigers. This tragedy should serve as a 

chilling wakeup call about our lack of 

safeguards around large, wild species 

being kept as pets. In the past 11 years 

in the United States, incidents involving captive big cats have resulted in 

the deaths of 21 people, 16 adults and 5 

children. During the same time period, 

mmaher on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE

S6344 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE September 13, 2012 

there have been 246 maulings, 253 escapes, 143 big cat deaths, and 128 

confiscations. 

This is also an animal welfare issue. 

Research shows that the captive big 

cat community is characterized by a 

systemic culture of inhumane mistreatment of the animals. One major 

reason for this is that once individual 

big cats have outgrown the infancy 

stage when they are most profitable, 

they are often warehoused in terrible 

conditions. Because private ownership 

is allowed to continue, many sanctuaries for mistreated or unwanted big 

cats are at or nearing capacity and 

lack financial reserves to provide 

greater assistance. The recent closure 

of a major sanctuary in Texas that had 

over 50 big cats has made matters 

worse. 

Third, this is a matter of conservation. Tigers, for example, are extremely endangered by poaching and 

trade, and illegal tiger products continue to be smuggled into the U.S. 

from foreign countries. One of the biggest threats to wild tigers is the demand for tiger parts and products, and 

leakage of captive tiger parts and products into the illegal market continues 

to encourage demand, perpetuating 

poaching and threatening remaining 

wild populations. 

Finally, this bill will address the current patchwork state regulation. There 

are still two states that have no regulations or permits at all regarding private ownership of exotic animals including big cats. Seven other States 

have little to no regulations of private 

ownership of exotic animals including 

big cats. Another 14 states allow big 

cat possession only with a state permit, and 27 states and the District of 

Columbia have enacted full bans on 

private ownership of big cats, though 

all of those exempt federally-licensed 

exhibitors. Given the risks I have already outlined, this kind of regulatory 

patchwork is simply unacceptable and 

could be dangerous. 

I believe that the Big Cats and Public 

Safety Protection Act will help ensure 

that lions, tigers, and other potentially 

dangerous big cats do not threaten 

public safety, harm global conservation 

efforts, or end up living in squalid conditions where they are subject to mistreatment and cruelty. 

A number of organizations are supportive of this bill, including the International Fund for Animal Welfare, the 

Humane Society of the United States, 

Born Free USA, Big Cat Rescue, the 

Animal Welfare Institute, and the 

World Wildlife Foundation. 

I would like to recognize Senators 

LIEBERMAN, SANDERS, and BLUMENTHAL

as original cosponsors of this bill. I 

look forward to continued progress in 

enhancing the protection and conservation of wild big cats and in increasing 

public safety from the dangers of these 

untamed animals. 

By Mr. AKAKA: 

S. 3548. A bill to clarify certain provisions of the Native American Veterans 

Memorial Establishment Act of 1994; to 

the Committee on Indian Affairs. 

Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, as Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, I am introducing legislation to 

make technical corrections to the National Native American Veterans’ Memorial Act of 1994. 

The 1994 Act honors the profound 

contributions of Native Veterans by 

authorizing the construction of a National Native American Veterans’ Memorial. Unfortunately, technical issues 

with the law have made it difficult to 

move forward with the Memorial. The 

bill I am introducing today seeks to alleviate those obstacles. 

My legislation would make technical 

corrections in order to allow the National Museum of American Indian to 

join the National Congress of American 

Indians in the fundraising efforts for 

the Memorial. In addition, my bill 

would allow the Memorial to be constructed on the property provided for 

by the National Museum of American 

Indian Act. 

Per capita, American Indians, Alaska 

Natives, and Native Hawaiians serve at 

a higher rate in the Armed Forces than 

any other group of Americans. Native 

peoples have served in all of the Nation’s wars since the Revolutionary 

War. A memorial in their honor is welldeserved and long overdue. 

My non-controversial, no cost, technical amendments bill will make it 

easier to construct the authorized memorial to honor our Native Veterans. 

f 

SUBMITTED RESOLUTIONS 

SENATE RESOLUTION 554—CALLING ON THE GOVERNMENT OF 

THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF 

CHINA TO FACILITATE THE IMMEDIATE AND UNCONDITIONAL 

RELEASE OF GAO ZHISHENG, 

AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mr. CORNYN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations: 

S. RES. 554 

Whereas Gao Zhisheng is a prominent Chinese human rights lawyer known for representing religious minority groups, factory 

workers, coal miners, and victims of government land seizures; 

Whereas, in 2001, the Ministry of Justice of 

the People’s Republic of China listed Gao 

Zhisheng as one of the top ten lawyers in 

China; 

Whereas the Government of the People’s 

Republic of China arrested Gao Zhisheng on 

August 15, 2006, and prevented him from 

meeting with chosen legal counsel; 

Whereas, on December 22, 2006, Gao 

Zhisheng was convicted of inciting subversion and received a suspended sentence of 

three years subject to five years of probation; 

Whereas, in September 2007, authorities in 

China apprehended and detained Gao 

Zhisheng for 50 days; 

Whereas Gao Zhisheng claimed that during 

his detention, government officials threatened his life and tortured him, including 

beating him with electrified batons, urinating on him, leaving him tied up for hours, 

and holding lighted cigarettes close to his 

eyes and nose; 

Whereas the Government of the People’s 

Republic of China arrested and detained Gao 

Zhisheng again on February 4, 2009; 

Whereas Gao Zhisheng’s whereabouts were 

unknown until March 2010, when he resurfaced, only to be arrested once more on April 

20, 2010; 

Whereas, on November 19, 2010, the United 

Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention determined Gao Zhisheng’s ongoing detention to be arbitrary and in violation of 

international law; 

Whereas Gao Zhisheng was held for 20 

months before officials in China informed his 

family in December 2011 that he was being 

held at the Shaya County Prison in remote 

Xinjiang, China; 

Whereas authorities allowed Gao Zhiyi to 

visit his brother, Gao Zhisheng, in the Shaya 

County Prison for 30 minutes on March 24, 

2012, but then warned him not to speak to 

the media or he would not be allowed to visit 

his brother again; 

Whereas the arbitrary arrest and detention 

of attorneys who represent minority groups 

and human rights activists could have a 

chilling effect on other attorneys working 

with similar clients; 

Whereas Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted 

at New York December 16, 1966, to which the 

Government of the People’s Republic of 

China is a signatory, states, ‘‘No one shall be 

subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention.’’; 

Whereas the International Covenant on 

Civil and Political Rights also guarantees 

the right to freedom of expression; 

Whereas the wife of Gao Zhisheng, Geng 

He, and their two children have been afforded protection as political asylees in the 

United States; 

Whereas the United States Government 

has authorized Gao Zhisheng to enter the 

United States, based on his family’s successful claim of political asylum; and 

Whereas the continued detention of Gao 

Zhisheng, with limited or no access to family 

or legal counsel, by the Government of the 

People’s Republic of China is a source of 

grave concern to the United States Senate: 

Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the Senate calls on the Government of the People’s Republic of China— 

(1) to immediately facilitate continued access to Gao Zhisheng by his family and lawyers; 

(2) to facilitate the immediate and unconditional release of Gao Zhisheng, including 

allowing Mr. Gao to leave China to come to 

the United States to be reunited with his 

family, should he wish to do so; and 

(3) to release all persons in China who have 

been arbitrarily detained. 

f 

SENATE RESOLUTION 555—SUPPORTING THE GOALS AND 

IDEALS OF ‘‘NATIONAL SAVE 

FOR RETIREMENT WEEK’’, INCLUDING RAISING PUBLIC 

AWARENESS OF THE VARIOUS 

TAX-PREFERRED RETIREMENT 

VEHICLES AND INCREASING PERSONAL FINANCIAL LITERACY 

Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. ENZI, 

and Mr. CARDIN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions: 

mmaher on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with CONG-REC-ONLINE