January 14, 2009 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S393 

while it is true that gas prices have retreated from their historic highs since 

last summer, the principle still stands: 

the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, 

should have discretion in setting the 

mileage rate for charitable organizations. This legislation will provide immediate relief for volunteers serving 

our elderly, poor, frail, and at-risk 

Americans. I’m pleased that the senior 

Senator from Maine, Senator SNOWE, 

and my other colleagues, the senior 

Senator from New York, Senator SCHUMER, and the junior Senator from Nevada, Senator ENSIGN, have joined me 

in introducing this legislation. They 

have worked extremely hard on this 

issue. I would also like to thank Senators GRASSLEY, FEINGOLD, LEAHY, ALEXANDER, SANDERS, BURR, DODD, and 

CANTWELL for being original co-sponsors of this bill. 

The Internal Revenue Code does not 

fix a rate for individuals who are required to use their own vehicle for 

work, or for individuals taking a mileage deduction for moving purposes. The 

IRS is able to increase the deduction 

amount for these purposes to reflect 

the current economic climate and dramatically higher fuel prices. This is exactly what the IRS recently did. 

Last July, the IRS modified the 

standard mileage rates for computing 

the deductible costs of operating an 

automobile for business, medical, or 

moving expenses. The revised standard 

mileage rate for business purposes increased from 50.5 cents per mile to 58.5 

cents. For medical and moving expenses, the IRS increased the rate from 

19 cents per mile to 27 cents per mile. 

I think the Nation’s volunteers who 

travel on behalf of charitable organizations deserve an increase in their mileage rate, too. 

Just recently, the IRS again modified 

the standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expenses. As of January 

1, the revised standard mileage rate for 

business purposes was decreased from 

58.5 cents to 55 cents. For medical and 

moving expenses, the IRS decreased 

the rate from 27 cents per mile to 24 

cents per mile. This ability to change 

the rate due to the cost of gasoline or 

the economic climate is crucial and 

should be permitted for the Nation’s 

charitable organizations. 

My bill gives the IRS flexibility in 

setting the rate so that volunteers for 

charitable organizations could be given 

the same tax benefit accruing for moving, medical, and business expenses. It 

also provides a floor for volunteers, not 

allowing their rate to be set lower than 

moving and medical rate. In today’s 

climate of increasing food and fuel 

prices, this bill will help relieve some 

of the pressure on charitable organizations and their volunteers. Additionally, this bill will allow the organization to reimburse the volunteer up to 

the business rate without any tax impact to volunteers. 

Take Meals on Wheels, for example. 

This organization delivers nutritious 

meals and other nutrition services to 

men and women who are elderly, homebound, disabled, frail, or otherwise atrisk. The services Meals on Wheels provides significantly improve the recipients’ quality of life and health, and 

often help to postpone institutionalization. 

Over the past year, there has been 

nearly a 20 percent increase in fuel and 

food prices, coupled with reduced government funding and fewer donations 

across the country. Nearly 60 percent 

of the estimated 5,000 programs that 

operate under the auspices of the Meals 

on Wheels Association of America have 

lost volunteers, in large part because it 

became too expensive for the volunteers to drive back and forth. Nearly 

half the programs have eliminated 

routes or consolidated meal services. 

About 38 percent of the programs have 

switched to delivering frozen meals, 

and about 30 percent are cutting personal visits from 5 days a week to one. 

In Maryland, the Central Maryland 

Meals on Wheels has experienced an increase of 7 percent in food costs and 

suppliers are charging higher delivery 

fees. The cost to fill up the vans with 

gas has increased. Fuel costs averaged 

$72,538.70 in fiscal year 2007; this year, 

the costs have jumped to $86,790.63. 

This is an organization with volunteers 

serving over 3,100 elderly, disabled, 

frail, and at-risk Marylanders. Its volunteers deserve relief from high gas 

prices just as much as people who use 

their car for work or for medical purposes or for moving. 

Throughout the United States, Meals 

on Wheels served over 3 million people 

and more than 250 million meals in fiscal year 2006. This is just one of thousands of charitable organizations. We 

need to encourage and support the 

Meals on Wheels volunteers and all 

other volunteers who need their cars to 

help their neighbors and communities. 

The Giving Incentives to Volunteers 

Everywhere bill will do just that, and I 

hope my colleagues will support it. 

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy 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. 243 

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 ‘‘Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere Act of 

2009’’ or the ‘‘GIVE Act of 2009’’. 

SEC. 2. DETERMINATION OF STANDARD MILEAGE 

RATE FOR CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS DEDUCTION. 

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

170 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to standard mileage rate for use of 

passenger automobile) is amended to read as 

follows: 

‘‘(i) STANDARD MILEAGE RATE FOR USE OF

PASSENGER AUTOMOBILE.—For purposes of 

computing the deduction under this section 

for use of a passenger automobile, the standard mileage rate shall be the rate determined by the Secretary, which rate shall not 

be less than the standard mileage rate used 

for purposes of section 213.’’. 

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment 

made by this section shall apply to miles 

traveled after the date of the enactment of 

this Act. 

SEC. 3. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME FOR 

CHARITABLE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Part III of subchapter B 

of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 

1986 (relating to items specifically excluded 

from gross income) is amended by adding at 

the end the following new section: 

‘‘SEC. 139C. CHARITABLE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT. 

‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—In the case of an individual, gross income shall not include 

amounts received from an organization described in section 170(c)(2) as reimbursement 

of operating expenses with respect to the use 

of a passenger automobile for the benefit of 

such organization. 

‘‘(b) LIMITATION.—The amount excluded 

from gross income under subsection (a) shall 

not exceed the product of the standard mileage rate used for purposes of section 162 multiplied by the number of miles traveled for 

which such reimbursement is made. 

‘‘(c) APPLICATION TO VOLUNTEER SERVICES

ONLY.—Subsection (a) shall not apply with 

respect to any expenses relating to the performance of services for compensation. 

‘‘(d) NO DOUBLE BENEFIT.—A taxpayer may 

not claim a deduction or credit under any 

other provision of this title with respect to 

reimbursements excluded from income under 

subsection (a). 

‘‘(e) EXEMPTION FROM REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.—Section 6041 shall not apply with respect to reimbursements excluded from income under subsection (a). 

‘‘(f) MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS.—For purposes of this section, no exclusion shall be 

allowed under subsection (a) for any reimbursement unless with respect to such reimbursement the taxpayer meets substantiation requirements similar to the requirements of section 274(d).’’. 

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of 

sections for part III of subchapter B of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding at 

the end the following new item: 

‘‘Sec. 139C. Charitable mileage reimbursement.’’. 

(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments 

made by this section shall apply to miles 

traveled after the date of the enactment of 

this Act. 

By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mrs. 

LINCOLN, and Mr. CASEY): 

S. 245. A bill to expand, train, and 

support all sectors of the health care 

workforce to care for the growing population of older individuals in the 

United States; to the Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. 

Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise 

today to introduce the Retooling the 

Health Care Workforce for an aging 

America Act, a bill that will address 

the impending and severe shortage of 

health care workers who are adequately trained and prepared to care 

for older Americans. The unfortunate 

fact of the matter is that while our 

country is aging rapidly, the number of 

health care workers devoted to caring 

for older Americans is experiencing a 

shortage—one that will only grow more 

desperate as the need for these caregivers skyrockets. 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with SENATE
S394 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE January 14, 2009 

We face many challenges. We know 

that few nursing programs require 

coursework in geriatrics and that in 

medical schools, comprehensive geriatric training is a rarity. Currently, 

only one percent of all physicians are 

certified geriatricians, even as the population of older people is on track to 

double by 2030, and less than one percent of all nurses are certified gerontological nurses. Absent any change, by 

2020, the supply of nurses in the United 

States will fall 29 percent below projected requirements, resulting in a severe shortage of nursing expertise relative to the demand for care of frail 

older adults. 

Ensuring that health care workers 

are properly trained in the provision of 

care to our seniors is vital. For the direct care workforce, which includes 

home care aides and personal care attendants, we know that state training 

requirements vary enormously, despite 

the fact that studies show that more 

training is correlated with better staff 

recruitment and retention. We also 

know that family caregivers want enhanced education and training to develop the necessary skills to provide 

the best possible care for an ailing family member. There are more than 44 

million people providing care for a 

family member or friend nationwide. 

These caregivers frequently do the 

same work as a professional caregiver, 

but they do so voluntarily and with little or no training. To their loved one, 

they are the doctor, the nurse, the assistant, the therapist, and oftentimes 

the sole source of emotional and financial support. 

Fortunately, knowing what we need 

to change is half the battle. The bill I 

introduce today will expand, train, and 

support the workforce that is dedicated 

to providing care for the older members of our population, incorporating 

the major recommendations for improving the skills and preparedness of 

the health care workforce put forth in 

the Institute of Medicine report, ‘‘Retooling for an Aging America: Building 

the Healthcare Workforce.’’ It has the 

support of many national organizations, such as AARP, the American 

Health Care Association, the American 

Association of Homes and Services for 

the Aging, Consumers Union, Family 

Caregiver Alliance, the National Alliance for Caregiving, the National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, Alzheimer’s Association, the American 

Geriatrics Society, the National Association for Home Care and Hospice, 

Paraprofessional HealthCare Institute, 

the American Association of Geriatric 

Psychiatry, Alliance for Aging Research, and The Catholic Health Association. 

By the year 2020, it is estimated that 

the number of older adults in need of 

care will increase by one-third. The 

United States will not be able to meet 

the approaching demand for health 

care and long-term care without a 

workforce that is prepared for the job. 

Bolstering the health care workforce 

will be an integral part of national 

health care reform, and I look forward 

to working with Finance and HELP 

Committee leaders on incorporating 

this legislation into their policy proposals. 

By Mr. DURBIN: 

S. 246. A bill to amend title 38, 

United States Code, to improve the 

quality of care provided to veterans in 

Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities, to encourage highly 

qualified doctors to serve in hard-tofill positions in such medical facilities, 

and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. 

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, in the 

fall of 2007, at least nine veterans died 

at the Marion VA Medical Center as a 

result of the poor medical care they received. We immediately learned that a 

VA surgeon, who had operated on some 

of these veterans, was not qualified to 

work at the VA but slipped through the 

hiring process. Later, VA investigations revealed much larger problems in 

the management of the facility—problems that employees kept secret out of 

fear for losing their jobs. Today, I am 

reintroducing legislation to help ensure that incidents like these never 

take place again at Marion or another 

VA medical center. 

I asked the VA to investigate the circumstances surrounding these unfortunate deaths as soon as they came to 

light. The VA investigation revealed 

that Marion hospital management 

knew that doctors, including the surgeon at issue, were not properly 

credentialed but failed to act. The surgeon remained employed at the Marion 

hospital and practiced there for more 

than a year. Had he not been hired to 

work at Marion, many of his patients 

may have survived their surgeries. 

The VA investigation revealed additional quality of care issues at the 

Marion hospital. Management disregarded VA quality care directives in 

the face of serious patient incident reports and surgical data collected to ensure quality of care. They ignored or 

failed to recognize warning signs that 

there were problems in the surgical 

program. 

The investigation also showed many 

Marion Medical Center employees 

feared reporting quality of care issues. 

They worried that quality of care 

might be suffering at the facility but 

hesitated to report those concerns for 

fear of losing their jobs. A primary reason is that such reports were funneled 

through management at the facility, 

rather than being handled by an independent and confidential outlet focused 

solely on quality of care. 

The legislation I am introducing 

would improve quality of care across 

the VA medical care system. 

First, it would improve the process of 

vetting doctors who apply to or work 

for the VA and restore accountability 

to physician hiring and retention practices. 

Second, the legislation would expand 

the quality control programs in the VA 

health care system. The bill creates 

new quality assurance officer positions, 

gives VA employees new forums to 

raise concerns about the quality of 

care at a VA facility, without fear of 

retribution, and establishes strong peer 

review mechanisms for physicians. 

Third, the legislation would create 

incentives to encourage high-quality 

doctors to practice at VA hospitals. In 

return for agreeing to practice in hardto-serve areas, doctors and medical 

students could participate in student 

loan forgiveness and tuition reimbursement programs. Doctors would also be 

eligible to participate in the federal 

employee health insurance program. 

Fourth, where practical, VA medical 

facilities would be required to establish 

affiliations with nearby medical 

schools. These partnerships would expose medical students to careers with 

the VA. In return, the VA would benefit from the energy and innovative 

ideas brought by students working in 

their facilities. In addition, VA hospitals would benefit from access to experienced medical school faculty members. 

Finally, the bill would encourage the 

VA to increase its recruitment of experienced doctors who are willing to 

practice for our veterans. The VA must 

hire and retain only highly qualified 

doctors as it takes on these tremendous responsibilities. 

Every one of the tragic deaths at the 

Marion VA hospital violated the obligation our Nation owes to its veterans. 

Each of their lives can never be replaced. The Veterans Health Care Quality Improvement Act is a strong step 

toward avoiding such tragedies in the 

future and reestablishing trust in the 

veterans health care system. 

By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, 

Ms. COLLINS, and Mr. SCHUMER): 

S. 247. A bill to accelerate motor fuel 

savins nationwide and provide incentives to registered owners of high fuel 

consumption automobiles to replace 

such automobiles with fuel efficient 

automobiles or public transportation; 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I 

rise today to introduce the ‘‘Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles 

Act.’’ This legislation is cosponsored 

by Senators SUSAN COLLINS and 

CHARLES SCHUMER. A companion bill is 

also being introduced today in the 

House of Representatives by Mr. 

ISRAEL and Mr. INSLEE. 

Let me first acknowledge the important role of one of my colleagues, Senator SALAZAR, who initiated much of 

the thought and drafting for this legislation at the end of the last Congress. 

I thank him for his leadership, and I 

thank him for letting us take up the 

work needed to move this bill forward 

as he begins to transition into his new 

role with the incoming Obama administration. 

Last Congress, we successfully enacted legislation—which I authored 


rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with SENATE