George Allen

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I would rather make sure there is adequate discussion on the other votes. I believe there is complete agreement on my amendment. I yield my time to the Senator so he may explain his amendment.

Mr. ALLEN. Ok. I had better sit down.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I yield back whatever time remains so we can proceed with the vote on amendment No. 2702.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for their support of the amendment. I ask unanimous consent that Senators Collins, Helms, and John Warner be added as cosponsors.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I commend Senator Sessions for his leadership and echo all of the comments he made in support of this measure. I strongly support, as a cosponsor, this amendment which is entitled the American Family Economic Security and Stimulus Act. This amendment, due to the great leadership of Senator Sessions, as well as his ingenuity, has provided us with what I believe to be a very common sense, compassionate, pro-family package that will help stimulate the economy and help American families and businesses get through the current economic recession. When one thinks of stimulus or stimulus policy--I know the Presiding Officer remembers the discussion on the concept of stimulus--it should be a change in policy which will induce or spur economic activity, whether it is investment or whether it is spending, that would otherwise not occur but for the change in policy. This amendment represents a very worker-oriented, pro-family economic aid and stimulus package that will provide immediate financial relief to working families. It will ensure more of their hard-earned money stays in their wallets, and they spend it as they see fit. There is the additional $150 a month in the hands of working Americans through advanced payment on the earned-income tax credit. That is really an immediate 50 to 60 cents per hour pay raise for workers in the lowest income levels. It increases the child tax credit to $1,000 for the current fiscal year, and it accelerates the rate reduction for the 28 percent tax bracket to 25 percent. I thank Senator Sessions for including the educational opportunity tax credit in this important legislation. This is a concept that I ran on in my campaign. It is one many have heard me discuss. What I am doing in adapting this idea, the education opportunity tax credit, to a stimulus package is to create an immediate incentive for families, parents of children who are in kindergarten through 12th grade, to buy computers, educational software, or computer peripherals. It is a technology-related amendment. Specifically, what this amendment, the Sessions-Allen amendment, would do is provide parents who have children in kindergarten through 12th grade with an immediate $2,500 tax credit to buy computers, educational software, or peripherals. It would be for only 3 months. It would provide those families with the financial means necessary to provide their children with greater educational choice and opportunities best suited to their individual needs. Parents know the needs of their children better than anyone. We know in studies about the digital divide that youngsters who have computers at home do better in school. They stay in school. They don't drop out. This is an important way of empowering parents to provide computers and educational software and peripherals to their children. As far as the economic stimulus of it, if the idea of education and empowering parents is not sufficient to convince my colleagues, let's recognize what this will do for the economy. We can look at the States as our laboratories for a lot of good ideas. Experience shows in the States that even a small temporary reduction in taxes can bring about huge increases in computer sales. In South Carolina, they had a sales tax holiday on computers for only 3 days. What was the result? Computer sales increased more than tenfold, over 1,000 percent, in those 3 days. In Pennsylvania, they eliminated the sales tax on computers for 1 week. CPU sales increased sixfold in that time.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, does the Senator from Montana wish to discuss this amendment? I only have maybe 30 seconds, and I would be happy to yield to the Senator from Montana.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Helms be added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 2702.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I hope the Senate will support this idea of empowering parents, helping with technology, and helping out our economy as well. It is a good, commonsense approach. I thank the Presiding Officer for giving me the additional 30 seconds.

Mr. ALLEN. The designation of a terrorist attack zone would be made by the President. Once you get past the rescue mission, the immediate response, and when the zone is designated a recovery scene, the tax exemption ends. The intent is for this to benefit those who rush in when there is still an opportunity to save a life; those first responders who themselves are endangered by the initial attack. I would not imagine that would last for anymore than a month. And again, it is validated on a monthly basis, like the combat zone tax exemption.

Mr. ALLEN. I would appreciate that, Mr. President.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise to ask for my colleagues support of amendment No. 2702, my ``Terrorist Zone Tax Exemption Act.'' I would like to share with the Presiding Officer, my colleagues, and the American people the purpose of this amendment. As we well know, the tragic events of September 11 demonstrated the worst attack that we have seen in this country, maybe in our entire history. At the same time--while seeing some of the most vile activity that mankind has ever seen--we saw a demonstration of the best of the American spirit. Unfortunately, our Nation has been forever changed since those attacks of September 11, 2001. However, we should remember that we have been changed in some good ways. We are now united and resolved--very resolved--to combat terrorism worldwide. This war on terrorism is unlike any other war we have ever fought. Indeed, the attack of September 11 has actually changed the definition of combatants, so that now not only are military personnel tasked to locate and eradicate potential terrorist threats, but also civilian police, fire and rescue personnel are charged with maintaining public safety after a terrorist attack. And they are all subject to attack and risk. In recognition of this new reality, I have offered this amendment that will extend the current tax exemption for military service members serving in a combat zone--use that same logic, that same principle to provide those same sorts of tax exemption benefits--to civilian uniformed employees who respond to terrorist attacks on our own soil. Specifically, my amendment includes those brave police officers, firefighters, and EMTs who risk their lives to defend us and our property. It defines a terrorist attack zone as an area where someone has attempted to intimidate or coerce the civilian population or influence the policy of a government by conducting criminal terrorist acts. It also extends this exemption to those who are now an integral part of our growing homeland security network. Congress has already recognized the extraordinary sacrifices that our members of the Armed Forces have performed in their service in combat zones. Let us take this opportunity to honor our law enforcement officers, firefighters, and rescue personnel who have also placed themselves in danger in service to their country, to their States, and to their communities in protecting their fellow citizens from the enemy and these terrorist attacks. Let's recognize, whether they were in the World Trade Center, at the Pentagon, or on airplanes that were commandeered, people were in dangerous situations, and many lost their lives. Others were rescuing people in toxic air, where there was falling debris, where there was burning embers or plastics or fuel, and other dangerous situations. Our enemies, in their attacks, make all Americans--not just our military, but our civilians as well--the target of their attacks. They do so without regard for the thousands of lives that would be affected by these attacks. So now the Federal Government must adapt the Tax Code to account for those who serve the public's safety here at home as it does for those who serve our military objectives. These wonderful men and women we have heard about, read about--many who lost their lives; but also those who survived--these men and women are patriots; they are heroes. All of those who responded to this vile act of war on the United States on September 11, 2001, carry forth a unity of purpose for compassion, for liberty, and for justice. We must honor their hard work and resolve, for their example truly exemplifies our diverse, strong, and respectful Nation. And so I ask my colleagues to join me in supporting my amendment. It is an expression of gratitude to those who wear the badges, wear the firefighter boots, carry the medical bags, and answer the call to protect life and property in the wake of the dastardly, cowardly attacks of terrorists. This measure has been supported by many organizations. It has the support of the 299,000 members of the Fraternal Order of Police; the International Association of Fire Chiefs; the New York City Detectives Endowment Association, representing 7,500 active New York Police Department detectives; the National Association of Police Officers, representing 220,000 law enforcement officers across our country. The Capital Police Labor Board strongly supports it as well. Some may ask what is the fiscal impact of this. If, say, you were a police officer or firefighter or an EMT worker responding to a terrorist attack such as that attacks on New York City and the Pentagon--and those are the only places that would fit the description of a terrorist attack zone under this bill--your income for that month of September, would be exempt from Federal taxation, just as a military pilot flying over Afghanistan receives now. That income that he earns or she earns is exempt from Federal taxes for time spent in response, and is validated on a month-to-month basis. It comes out to approximately $205 a month for our rescue workers. It is not a lot of money, but it is an expression of gratitude. The total fiscal impact is about $7 million. Again, not much in the whole scheme of things here in Washington, but still an expression of support. I would like to read from some of the groups that have endorsed this legislation or this amendment. For example, the Detectives Endowment Association of the Police Department for the City of New York: As President of the New York City Detectives Endowment Association, representing 7,500 active detective members of the NYPD, and as President of the National Association of Police Organizations, representing 220,000 law enforcement officers from all across the United States, I wish to commend and support [this legislation.] Mr. Tom Scotto, who is the President of both the Endowment Association and NAPO, goes on to write: Having personally experienced the tragic events of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, I believe that this legislation is justifiable and will go a long way towards boosting the morale of these public servants who respond to such events. From the Grand Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police, their President, Steve Young, writes that they very strongly support this Terrorist Response Tax Exemption Act or this amendment. They are in strong support. September 11 was a day of terrible tragedy, but in the midst of flames and the rubble, we saw shining examples of heroism from our law enforcement officers and other rescue workers. Placing their own lives in jeopardy, these courageous men and women helped rescue thousands. They called their own nation to heroism in the face of the long and difficult struggle that looms in our future. Your bill would exempt the income of uniform rescue personnel in ``terrorist attack zones,'' from income tax during the months in which they perform their duties in response to such attacks. Our nation is engaged in a conflict that will not be fought between just armies or soldiers. Our hidden enemies aim their attacks at civilian targets and public safety officers--police, firefighters, and emergency medical personnel--will be the first to respond to the scene, not the U.S. military. We think it fitting, therefore, that your bill mirrors current law giving military personnel tax relief while serving in a combat zone. It goes on to commend the measure. Finally, I would like to share with my colleagues a letter of endorsement from the International Association of Fire Chiefs. This is signed by their executive director, Gary Briese. Dear Senator Allen: On behalf of the International Association of Fire Chiefs and America's 1.1 million fire fighters, I would like to thank you for introducing legislation to provide tax relief for fire fighters and other first responders who respond to acts of terrorism. As we understand it, your [measure], the Terrorist Response Exemption Act, would provide an exemption from federal income taxes to those who respond to terrorist incidents while they are engaged in emergency operations. This exemption already exists for members of our armed forces who enter into combat zones. Assistance of any kind to fire fighters is of great help, particularly in the wake of the stunning and tragic events of September 11. Thank you for your continued support of our nation's fire fighters. Those are the comments of many decent leaders who represent literally tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of outstanding individuals who devote their lives to protecting their communities and the lives of people in their communities. Since these vile attacks of September 11, we have seen the nature of warfare change dramatically. As long as our enemies are willing to conduct these suicide bombings, these terrorist attacks, acts we consider brazen and outrageous, and are particularly outrageous since they are attacking us here in our homeland, civilians, undefended men, women, and children, people commandeered on an aircraft, people in office buildings, as long as this continues, our laws should reflect this new reality. Our firefighters, police and EMTs, other rescue personnel have all proven themselves to be not only heroes but superheroes in these attacks; they will hopefully never be called on again to perform such duty. But if they do, if that sad eventuality should occur, I think they deserve all the protections and benefits in these modern combat zones that we can offer. I ask my colleagues, in a bipartisan effort to support this amendment to this measure, let's support our firefighters, our police, our emergency medical personnel. This is a sad new reality for our country. We are united. Let's support our heroes. It is not a lot of money, but it means a lot. I think it expresses our sentiment that we want to support them as they protect us and our lives and our livelihoods. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ALLEN. I do not. vote explanation

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 2702.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment to increase the 30-percent bonus depreciation from 1 year to 3 years. The underlying proposal, while improvement over the previous one, which was only 10 percent, is still too short. It is not enough time to help revive the high-tech economy, and, indeed, our general economy to help create more jobs. If the underlying proposal were implemented, the bonus depreciation would only last until September of 2002, which is merely 8 months away. The amendment of the Senator from Oregon was passed by the House of Representatives and was supported by the Bush administration. The argument that the Senator from Oregon has made makes a great deal of sense. It will boost investment. It will boost growth in the high-tech sector in particular. Why does that matter? I was just meeting with high-tech folks from Redmond, WA, Silicon Valley in California, and here in Virginia. Whether in Oregon, or anywhere else, this proposal makes good sense. Senator Smith's amendment takes aim at the core problem of our slumping economy which is seeing a huge drop in investment, in equipment, and in machinery. Over 3 years, a 30-percent bonus depreciation would get the investment engine going and running strong again. It would lower the cost of new capital spending. It would provide a stimulus for a broad array of industries, including telecommunications, technology and others, including transportation. The current depreciation schedule clearly has not kept up with our economy. It is especially harmful in this economic slowdown. Senator Smith introduced this proposal on behalf of the Senate Republican High Tech Task Force late last year. Indeed, looking at the concept of the enhanced expensing as proposed by Senator Smith for bonus depreciation, it would be highly beneficial to the high-tech community, the sector of our economy that has driven productivity growth and created millions of jobs during the last decade. The information technology industry makes up only 8.2 percent of the U.S. economy. Yet it has accounted for almost 30 percent of the real gross domestic growth from 1994 to 2000. Much of this growth resulted from the increase in investment in hardware, software, networking, and communications systems. As the economic slowdown has persisted, decreasing IT investments have substantially weakened our American economic growth. During these uncertain economic times, as Senator Smith stated, businesses have decreased motivation. They do not want to take those risks in buying new equipment and new systems because they are worried about what the economy may do. The result, obviously, has an adverse impact on job opportunities for those who fabricate the chips, for those who assemble the computers, and for those who work on the programs and all the innovations and adaptations that improve our lives--whether it is in education or communication services and manufacturing. This amendment has a robust expensing provision. I think it can turn around our bleak economic scenario. The enhanced expensing provision in this amendment, of which I am proud to be a cosponsor with Senator Smith, has broad support. As I noted previously, the House passed it. This has the support of leading high-tech trade associations, including AeA, CapNet, EIA, BSA, the Information Technology Association of America, the Information Technology Industry Council, and TechNet. We need to get into some details of the economy because that bolsters the argument about why we need to pass this amendment. Diminishing IT investments impact our economy. By the fourth quarter of 2000, conditions were changing dramatically from what they were in the previous 6 years. Gross domestic product growth plunged. It was precipitated in part by an 8.4-percent drop in investment for all equipment and software, and a 9.5-percent decline in investments in computers and peripheral equipment in the first half of the year 2001. To put this in perspective, 2001 was the first time since 1974 that business investments in IT declined over a 12-month period. In the first quarter of 2001, the trend acted as a drag on our economy subtracting an estimated 4.41 percentage points from overall growth. In the second quarter of 2001, the impact was even more dramatic with diminishing investments in technology equipment and software subtracting over 1.52 percentage points from U.S. economic growth. Some of the decline in IT investments may be attributed to the lingering effects of Y2K, which caused many firms to accelerate their IT spending to ensure they could maintain current operations during the century date change in the year 2000. Other factors included diminishing revenues to commit to business expansion and upgrades, and the tendency to conserve capital during times of economic uncertainty and concerns arising from the terrorist attacks of September 11. All of these factors contribute to the decision to hold onto technology assets longer than normal in part to maximize tax deductions under the current five-year depreciation rules. So you might as well use it for the whole 5 years. That ought to be changed also. That is not the purpose of this amendment, but it points out the value of this amendment. If you have a long 5-year depreciation, such as if you upgraded for Y2K, and you have economic uncertainty, you see the exacerbated negative impact on our whole economy and jobs and spending. We need to have that stimulus. This is what this is. Of all the things that are in this underlying bill, this idea meets the concept and the definition of economic stimulus more than anything else that has been presented so far. There may be others coming up, but this is the best so far. An economic stimulus ought to be a change in our tax or regulatory policies that induces or spurs spending or economic decisionmaking that would not otherwise occur but for that change in the tax laws. This meets that definition. This will spur businesses to say: Hey, let's start planning. Let's upgrade our technology. Granted, we may have 5 years of depreciation, but with this 30-percent depreciation, this bonus depreciation, this makes economic sense for us. What will be the result of that? Our businesses will be more productive. They will be more efficient. But those who produce and fabricate the chips, those who assemble the computers, those who develop the programs will all have jobs. And they are good-paying jobs. And that helps out the whole economy. So the tendency we have right now of people delaying the decision to make new investments will certainly be changed by this amendment. So I ask that all our colleagues unite for the one thing that really does unite us; and that is this amendment by Senator Smith of Oregon. There are many cosponsors, including virtually everyone on the High Tech Task Force on the Republican side. I hope our friends on the other side of the aisle, who have made progress from the original proposal, will realize this is the ideal and this will not only be bonus depreciation for businesses and entrepreneurs and enterprises across America, and help create jobs, but it will be a bonus for the American economy. I commend Senator Smith of Oregon and ask my colleagues to support this amendment. Let's get America working again. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I say to my friend from Montana, I would have liked to yield 5 minutes, but I had better take them.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I spoke to Senator Baucus, and I know he has a measure he wants to discuss and, without objection, I would actually defer to Senator Baucus for his remarks he wanted to make if I may follow right behind Senator Baucus.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Reserving the right to object.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I say to the Members, this final victims package is a good package. I earlier introduced a measure to make sure we included the provisions of S. 1433,which is supported by Senator Warner, Senator Campbell, and Senator Craig. I am glad these ideas have been recognized, that this war we are fighting is against terrorists who target defenseless men, women, and children. The areas in which these attacks occur are combat zones. I am glad this package has been worked out, because the last thing the families of these victims need to be worrying about is paying taxes, whether income taxes or other types of taxes--this bill addresses those concerns. While my colleague from New York may want to add some other items to this measure--but at this late hour will not--I commend to my colleagues the fact that the police officers and firefighters who first responded to the World Trade Center attacks, as well as the Pentagon, risked their lives in hazardous conditions, breathing toxic gases, to save the lives of their fellow citizens. In my view, those who are serving in those terrorist attack zones ought to be looked upon as the same as those who work in combat zones, and the taxes of those first responders for that month ought not be subject to income taxes. I am going to work next year to get this proper recognition for our firefighters, law enforcement officers, and rescue personnel, but I do not want to hold up this good victims' relief package which means a good deal to a lot of families who feel a very big hole in their hearts during this holiday season. I yield the floor.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise to discuss a bill we just passed, S. 1858. I thank my colleagues for their support: Senator Kerry, Senator Nickles, Senator Kennedy, and Senators Warner, Hatch, and Clinton. Particularly, I thank Senator Nickles for he was of great help in getting this measure passed. S. 1858 deals with the upcoming trial of Zacarias Moussaoui. Moussaoui has been charged in a six-count indictment with undertaking ``the same preparation for murder'' as the perpetrators of the September 11 attacks, but his alleged participation had been thwarted by his arrest the previous month in Minnesota. Now this measure is one that is helpful to all of us in that he is the only suspect with any direct connection with the most vile and horrific terrorist attack in our history. There will be substantial interest in the trial of Mr. Moussaoui on the part of those who have been left behind, especially the families and loved ones of thousands who were killed on that dreadful day. By some estimates, there are as many as 10,000 or 15,000 victims who may have an interest in viewing this historic legal proceeding that will take place in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Alexandria. The current policy of the Federal Judicial Conference does not permit the televising of court proceedings. I am supporting legislation that would give Federal judges such discretion. But until that legislation passes, we will not be able to address the interests of victims' families to view the proceedings in the Moussaoui trial. In the past, exceptions have been made through congressional action, most notably allowing the closed circuit transmission of the trials of Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols from Denver to Oklahoma City, so that families in Oklahoma could witness the proceedings. That is where Senator Nickles was especially empathetic and knowledgeable about how much this means to the victims' families. This legislation, S. 1858, is modeled on the law that allowed the Oklahoma City victims to witness the McVeigh and Nichols trials, and this bill will extend the same compassionate access or benefit to the numerous victims and families of September 11. The legislation calls for the closed circuit broadcast of the court proceedings to convenient locations in Northern Virginia; Los Angeles and San Francisco, CA; New York City; Boston; and Newark, NJ. Also ``with the amendment in such other locations as the court shall determine to be desirable,'' to use the exact language, and other locations the court may find desirable in their discretion. The reason for the six places is that these are the sites of the terrorist attacks: the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, and the others are the sites where commandeered aircraft either departed or intended to arrive. Unfortunately, they did not. These locations obviously would have the greatest number of interested people and have victims in this attack. The legislation allows those who the court determines to have a compelling interest but who are unable to attend because of expense and convenience or simply a lack of space in the courtroom to witness the trial. The courtroom in Alexandria, VA, holds fewer than 100 people, and the sheer number of victims and others who meet the standard make it impossible for them to observe in person. While there is a great, deep wound for the larger society, the wound is deepest and most deeply and painfully felt by the survivors and families who lost loved ones. I am glad we recognize in the Senate that we owe it to those victims' families to allow them to see this open proceeding which is directly related to the horrific event of September 11 that took the lives of their loved ones. In doing so, for those who want to watch the trials-- others may not--for those who want to, it will begin to help them heal. It is a right approach that a compassionate nation wants to provide to these victims' families. I thank the Senators for their support, not of this legislation but for their support of the families of these victims. I yield back the remainder of my time. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, before I get into my statement, I just want to say one thing about all of this deliberation on the farm bill. As far as family farmers are concerned, I am glad for Virginia family farmers in the peanut business that this law is not going to be changed before October of 2002. Changing those laws would have been devastating to those family farmers. And while the Cochran-Roberts and Hutchinson amendments were better, because of the fact this is not going into effect now, they can plan, with their leases for equipment, in this final year of this farm bill. (The remarks of Mr. Allen and Mr. Wellstone pertaining to the introduction of S. 1848 are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'')

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Homestead Preservation Act. It is a bill to provide displaced workers with access to low-interest loans to help cover monthly home mortgage payments while they are looking for a new job. This is commonsense, compassionate legislation designed to help working families, who through no fault of their own, are adversely affected by international competition. During the past months, all Americans have been deluged with grim news of recessions, plummeting consumer confidence and rising unemployment. Since October of last year, unemployment has jumped 1.8 percent, bringing the unemployment rate to 5.7 percent, the highest in over 6 years. This is more than just a statistic. The 5.7 percent represents 8.2 million people who are now without a job, a paycheck, and the means by which to provide their family with a sense of economic security, knowing that the bills will be paid, food is on the table, gifts will be under the Christmas tree. Virginia has not escaped the effects of the recession. While the unemployment is not as high as the national average, we have seen a 1.4 percent increase in unemployment from October 2000 to October 2001. There were 20 mass layoffs in October, an increase of 8 from the year before. And there have been 2,713 new claims for unemployment benefits in October--almost double from October 2000. While these are uneasy times for everyone, regions such as Southwest Virginia and Southside, with heavy concentrations in manufacturing-- especially the textile and apparel industries--have been especially hard hit. Nationwide, employment in apparel manufacturing lost more than 10,000 jobs just last month. Factory employment has plummeted in the past year and a half. One of every three layoffs in Virginia is from the manufacturing industry, although only one in six jobs throughout the Commonwealth are in this sector. In Virginia, October was the 15th consecutive month of factory job losses. Virginia's Southside and Southwest regions are already suffering from the economic effects of international competition, such as NAFTA. Nationwide, an average of 37,500 Americans lose their jobs because of NAFTA-related competition each year. During the 1990s, Virginians saw the loss of 15,400 apparel jobs--a decline of 54.3 percent--and 15,300 textile jobs--a decline of 36 percent. Fair and free trade is necessary if American businesses are to have the opportunity to promote their goods and services and continue to expand through growth abroad. NAFTA has created a net increase in employment. As Governor of Virginia, I led several trade missions abroad to promote our products. We brought back agreements that initially meant half a billion dollars in new investment and sales for Virginia, investments made possible only through fair and free trade. But, while trade is helping our economy as a whole, there are many good, hard working families, who have been adversely affected by international competition--especially in the textile and apparel industries. Anytime a factory closes, it is a devastating blow to all of the families and businesses in the community and region. While I was proud of the outstanding way the close-knit Southside and Southwest communities in Virginia came together to help those who lost their jobs, when companies like Pluma and Tultex closed their doors, they should not be forced to go through these times alone. After the Tultex plant closing in Martinsville in early December of 1999, people donated toys to the Salvation Army to make sure that Christmas came to the homes of the thousands of laid off workers. I am proposing that the Federal Government do its part to help people through these tough times. There are already thoughtful programs in place, such as the NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance program, that helps workers get additional job skills training and employment assistance, and, provides extended unemployment benefits during job training. These programs are the result of the commonsense, logical conclusion that good, working people can lose their jobs because of trade--not because they did anything wrong or because they don't want to work. We ought to find a way to ease the stress and turmoil for people whose lives are unexpectedly thrown into transition after years of steady employment with a company that suddenly disappears. While these hard-working folks are finding appropriate employment, they should not fear losing their homes. For most people and families, their home is the largest investment they make in life. Many have considerable equity build up. Government agencies already have low-interest loan programs in place to help families who have met with unexpected economic disaster, such as a natural disaster like a hurricane, flood or tornado. When a factory closes, it is an economic disaster to these families and their communities. The effects are just as far reaching and certainly as economically devastating. Like a natural disaster, families displaced by international competition are not responsible for the events leading to the factory closings. The Federal Government ought to make the same disaster loan assistance programs available to our displaced workers. This is my rationale for introducing the Homestead Preservation Act. This legislation will provide temporary home mortgage assistance to displaced workers, helping them make ends meet during their search for a new job. Specifically, the Homestead Preservation Act authorizes the Department of Labor to administer a low-interest loan program--4 percent--for workers displaced due to international competition. The loan is for up to the amount of 12 monthly home mortgage payments. The program is authorized at $10 million per year, for 5 years. It distributes the loan through an account, providing monthly allocations to cover the amount of the worker's home mortgage payment. The loans could be paid off or repaid over a period of 5 years. No payments would be required until 6 months after the borrower has returned to work full-time. The loan is available only for the cost of a monthly home mortgage payment and covers only those workers displaced due to international competition and those who qualify for benefits under the NAFTA-TAAP and TAA benefits programs. Like the NAFTA-TAAP and TAA benefits programs, the Homestead Preservation Act recognizes that some temporary assistance is needed as workers take the time to become retrained and reeducated, expand upon their skills and search for new employment. As Governor, there was nothing I enjoyed more than being able to recruit and land investment from new or expanding enterprises in Virginia. By recruiting businesses, we brought new and better jobs for the hard-working, caring people of Virginia. One example is Drake Extrusion from the United Kingdom, which chose Martinsville Industrial Park for its new carpet and bedding fiber manufacturing plant. It was announced as a $12 million investment. It doubled in value at the official opening in 1996. It brought in additional small businesses. As of last year, Drake employed over 180 people. Unfortunately, it can take time to bring in new companies and industries to a region, just as it takes time to learn a new skill or earn a degree. Displaced families do not have time; they have monthly bills that must be paid, in full, no excuses. The Homestead Preservation Act provides the financial assistance necessary to bridge the time it takes to find employment. Without this bridge, many working families would not be able to take advantage of the opportunities our there for them. They would be denied the necessary tools to help them succeed in the changing economy. The current recession has made it even more vital that the Federal Government do what is right by our workers in the textile and apparel industries--in all industries suffering high rates of job losses due to international competition. Because of international competition, textile and apparel workers are even more vulnerable to the current economic situation making them ill-equipped to weather an economic downturn. For example, in 1999, the average wage rates in Virginia for a textile or apparel worker were 77 percent and 57 percent, respectively, of the overall average wage rate for Virginians. This provides for less money in the family's ``rainy day'' savings account. And right now, it is storming for these families. These jobs are not coming back. Only about 70 percent of displaced factory workers find reemployment, well below the access-industry average. Losses are expected to continue accumulating as the industries brace for worldwide open trade, which is scheduled to begin in 2005. When these workers are displaced, meager savings and temporary unemployment benefits are frequently not enough to cover expenses that had previously fit within the family budget. Without immediate help, these families, at the minimum, risk ruining their credit ratings and, in the worst-case scenario, could lose their home or car. The Homestead Preservation Act would provide families vital temporary financial assistance, enabling them to keep them to keep their homes and to protect their credit ratings as they work toward strengthening and updating their skills and continue their search for a new job. Hard-working Americans, facing such a harrowing situation, ought to have a response to help them. People need transitional help now. The Homestead Preservation Act provides the temporary financial tools necessary for displaced workers to get back on their feet and succeed. It is a caring, logical and responsible response. Mr. President, as I said, I rise today to introduce the Homestead Preservation Act. This is a commonsense, compassionate place of legislation that is designed to help working families who, through no fault of their own, lose their jobs as a result of international competition. It is a bill to provide displaced workers with access to low-interest loans to help cover monthly home mortgage payments while they are out looking for a job. During the past few months, all Americans have been deluged with grim news of recessions, plummeting consumer confidence, and rising unemployment Clearly, these are uneasy times for everyone in all regions of the country, whether in the South, the Midwest, the Northeast, and out West as well, but particularly in the areas where there are heavy concentrations of manufacturing. The textile and apparel industries have been especially hard hit. That industry is generally in the South and, to some extent, in the Midwest. Nationwide, employment in apparel manufacturing lost more than 10,000 jobs just last month. That is in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, Missouri, and various other States. Factory employment has plummeted in the past year and a half. In Virginia alone, about one out of every six jobs is in manufacturing. But as far as the layoffs, one out of every three layoffs in Virginia is from the manufacturing industry. I am a supporter of fair and free trade. I think trade is good for American consumers. It is good for our retailers and our farmers. I think it is necessary for our businesses and farmers to have opportunities to promote their goods, their products, their services abroad. That allows them to expand and grow. I think NAFTA has created a net increase in employment. As Governor of Virginia, I led several trade missions abroad, whether to Canada, Mexico, various countries in Western and Central Europe, as well as East Asia. We brought back agreements that initially meant over a half a billion dollars in new investment and sales for Virginia products. These investments and sales in Virginia were only made possible by fair and free trade. But while trade is helping our economy as a whole, there are many good, hard-working people and families who have been adversely affected by international competition, particularly in the textile and apparel industries. Any time a factory closes, it is a devastating blow to all of the families and, indeed, all of the businesses in the communities in that region. You can see, with great pride, how communities come together-- close knit communities--and try to help out if a major manufacturer shuts down. I remember back in December 2 years ago--in early December, 1999-- when Tultex shut down. Thousands of jobs were lost. People donated toys to the Salvation Army, though, to make sure Christmas would come to every family. What I am proposing is that the Federal Government does its part to help people through these tough times, so that people and communities are not alone during these transitions. There are already thoughtful programs in place. The NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance Program helps workers get additional job skills in training and employment assistance, as well as provides extended unemployment benefits during job training. These programs are the result of the good, commonsense, logical conclusion that working people can lose their jobs because of trade, not because they did anything wrong or because they did not want to work. They do want to work. We ought to find a way to help ease the stress and turmoil for people whose lives are unexpectedly thrown into transition after years of steady employment with a company that suddenly disappears. Especially in textile areas, you see folks who have worked there for decades; some of their parents may have worked at that same mill or facility. These are hard-working people. They are trying to find employment. But while they are doing so, they should not have to worry about or fear losing their homes. For most people, and most families, their home is the largest investment they will make in their lives. Many have considerable equity built up in their homes that could be lost. Government agencies already have low-interest loan programs in place to help families who have been hit with unexpected disasters--such as a natural disaster, such as a hurricane or a tornado or a flood. Whan a factory closes, it is truly an economic disaster to these families and communities. The effects are just as far reaching and certainly as economically devastating. Like a natural disaster, families displaced by international competition are not responsible for the events leading to those factory closings. The Federal Government ought to make similar disaster loan assistance programs available to our displaced workers. That is the rationale of my introduction of the Homestead Preservation Act. This legislation would provide temporary mortgage assistance to displaced workers, helping them make ends meet during the search for a new job. Specifically, the Homestead Preservation Act authorizes the Department of Labor to administer a low-interest loan program--4 percent--for workers displaced due to international competition. The loan is for up to the amount of 12 monthly home mortgage payments. The program is authorized at $10 million per year for 5 years. It distributes the loan through an account providing a monthly allocation to cover the amount of the worker's home mortgage payment. The loans would be paid or repaid and paid off over 5 years, but no payments would be required until 6 months after the worker has gotten back on his or her feet in gainful employment. The loan would be available only for the cost of the monthly home mortgage payment and covers only those workers displaced due to international competition and who would qualify for the benefits under the NAFTA-TAAP and the transitional adjustment assistance benefits programs. Working within the parameters and the certification and qualifications of the NAFTA-TAAP and the TAA benefits programs, the Homestead Preservation Act recognizes some temporary assistance is needed as workers take time to retrain and be reeducated and expand upon their skills and search for new employment. This will provide, in effect, a bridge loan assistance to these displaced workers. If you look at it, the unemployment benefits are fine, but usually they are not enough to cover the expenses which previously fit within a family budget. Without immediate help, these families, at a minimum, risk ruining their credit ratings and, in the worst case scenario, could lose their car or even their home. The Homestead Preservation Act would provide families with vital temporary financial assistance, enabling them to keep their homes, protect their credit ratings, and, as they work toward strengthening and improving their skills, to continue to be able to search for a job without worrying about losing their homes. They are under a harrowing situation. We ought to have a response to help them. There are many people who need transitional help right away. As we move forward to expand trade opportunities, let's also improve the transitional adjustment assistance programs. The Homestead Preservation Act provides the temporary financial tools necessary for displaced workers to get them back on their feet and to succeed. In my view, it is a very caring, logical and responsible response. I trust my colleagues will agree and support this reasonable, balanced idea. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and the section-by- section analysis be printed in the Record.

Mr. ALLEN

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Homestead Preservation Act. It is a bill to provide displaced workers with access to low-interest loans to help cover monthly home mortgage payments while they are looking for a new job. This is commonsense, compassionate legislation designed to help working families, who through no fault of their own, are adversely affected by international competition. During the past months, all Americans have been deluged with grim news of recessions, plummeting consumer confidence and rising unemployment. Since October of last year, unemployment has jumped 1.8 percent, bringing the unemployment rate to 5.7 percent, the highest in over 6 years. This is more than just a statistic. The 5.7 percent represents 8.2 million people who are now without a job, a paycheck, and the means by which to provide their family with a sense of economic security, knowing that the bills will be paid, food is on the table, gifts will be under the Christmas tree. Virginia has not escaped the effects of the recession. While the unemployment is not as high as the national average, we have seen a 1.4 percent increase in unemployment from October 2000 to October 2001. There were 20 mass layoffs in October, an increase of 8 from the year before. And there have been 2,713 new claims for unemployment benefits in October--almost double from October 2000. While these are uneasy times for everyone, regions such as Southwest Virginia and Southside, with heavy concentrations in manufacturing-- especially the textile and apparel industries--have been especially hard hit. Nationwide, employment in apparel manufacturing lost more than 10,000 jobs just last month. Factory employment has plummeted in the past year and a half. One of every three layoffs in Virginia is from the manufacturing industry, although only one in six jobs throughout the Commonwealth are in this sector. In Virginia, October was the 15th consecutive month of factory job losses. Virginia's Southside and Southwest regions are already suffering from the economic effects of international competition, such as NAFTA. Nationwide, an average of 37,500 Americans lose their jobs because of NAFTA-related competition each year. During the 1990s, Virginians saw the loss of 15,400 apparel jobs--a decline of 54.3 percent--and 15,300 textile jobs--a decline of 36 percent. Fair and free trade is necessary if American businesses are to have the opportunity to promote their goods and services and continue to expand through growth abroad. NAFTA has created a net increase in employment. As Governor of Virginia, I led several trade missions abroad to promote our products. We brought back agreements that initially meant half a billion dollars in new investment and sales for Virginia, investments made possible only through fair and free trade. But, while trade is helping our economy as a whole, there are many good, hard working families, who have been adversely affected by international competition--especially in the textile and apparel industries. Anytime a factory closes, it is a devastating blow to all of the families and businesses in the community and region. While I was proud of the outstanding way the close-knit Southside and Southwest communities in Virginia came together to help those who lost their jobs, when companies like Pluma and Tultex closed their doors, they should not be forced to go through these times alone. After the Tultex plant closing in Martinsville in early December of 1999, people donated toys to the Salvation Army to make sure that Christmas came to the homes of the thousands of laid off workers. I am proposing that the Federal Government do its part to help people through these tough times. There are already thoughtful programs in place, such as the NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance program, that helps workers get additional job skills training and employment assistance, and, provides extended unemployment benefits during job training. These programs are the result of the commonsense, logical conclusion that good, working people can lose their jobs because of trade--not because they did anything wrong or because they don't want to work. We ought to find a way to ease the stress and turmoil for people whose lives are unexpectedly thrown into transition after years of steady employment with a company that suddenly disappears. While these hard-working folks are finding appropriate employment, they should not fear losing their homes. For most people and families, their home is the largest investment they make in life. Many have considerable equity build up. Government agencies already have low-interest loan programs in place to help families who have met with unexpected economic disaster, such as a natural disaster like a hurricane, flood or tornado. When a factory closes, it is an economic disaster to these families and their communities. The effects are just as far reaching and certainly as economically devastating. Like a natural disaster, families displaced by international competition are not responsible for the events leading to the factory closings. The Federal Government ought to make the same disaster loan assistance programs available to our displaced workers. This is my rationale for introducing the Homestead Preservation Act. This legislation will provide temporary home mortgage assistance to displaced workers, helping them make ends meet during their search for a new job. Specifically, the Homestead Preservation Act authorizes the Department of Labor to administer a low-interest loan program--4 percent--for workers displaced due to international competition. The loan is for up to the amount of 12 monthly home mortgage payments. The program is authorized at $10 million per year, for 5 years. It distributes the loan through an account, providing monthly allocations to cover the amount of the worker's home mortgage payment. The loans could be paid off or repaid over a period of 5 years. No payments would be required until 6 months after the borrower has returned to work full-time. The loan is available only for the cost of a monthly home mortgage payment and covers only those workers displaced due to international competition and those who qualify for benefits under the NAFTA-TAAP and TAA benefits programs. Like the NAFTA-TAAP and TAA benefits programs, the Homestead Preservation Act recognizes that some temporary assistance is needed as workers take the time to become retrained and reeducated, expand upon their skills and search for new employment. As Governor, there was nothing I enjoyed more than being able to recruit and land investment from new or expanding enterprises in Virginia. By recruiting businesses, we brought new and better jobs for the hard-working, caring people of Virginia. One example is Drake Extrusion from the United Kingdom, which chose Martinsville Industrial Park for its new carpet and bedding fiber manufacturing plant. It was announced as a $12 million investment. It doubled in value at the official opening in 1996. It brought in additional small businesses. As of last year, Drake employed over 180 people. Unfortunately, it can take time to bring in new companies and industries to a region, just as it takes time to learn a new skill or earn a degree. Displaced families do not have time; they have monthly bills that must be paid, in full, no excuses. The Homestead Preservation Act provides the financial assistance necessary to bridge the time it takes to find employment. Without this bridge, many working families would not be able to take advantage of the opportunities our there for them. They would be denied the necessary tools to help them succeed in the changing economy. The current recession has made it even more vital that the Federal Government do what is right by our workers in the textile and apparel industries--in all industries suffering high rates of job losses due to international competition. Because of international competition, textile and apparel workers are even more vulnerable to the current economic situation making them ill-equipped to weather an economic downturn. For example, in 1999, the average wage rates in Virginia for a textile or apparel worker were 77 percent and 57 percent, respectively, of the overall average wage rate for Virginians. This provides for less money in the family's ``rainy day'' savings account. And right now, it is storming for these families. These jobs are not coming back. Only about 70 percent of displaced factory workers find reemployment, well below the access-industry average. Losses are expected to continue accumulating as the industries brace for worldwide open trade, which is scheduled to begin in 2005. When these workers are displaced, meager savings and temporary unemployment benefits are frequently not enough to cover expenses that had previously fit within the family budget. Without immediate help, these families, at the minimum, risk ruining their credit ratings and, in the worst-case scenario, could lose their home or car. The Homestead Preservation Act would provide families vital temporary financial assistance, enabling them to keep them to keep their homes and to protect their credit ratings as they work toward strengthening and updating their skills and continue their search for a new job. Hard-working Americans, facing such a harrowing situation, ought to have a response to help them. People need transitional help now. The Homestead Preservation Act provides the temporary financial tools necessary for displaced workers to get back on their feet and succeed. It is a caring, logical and responsible response. Mr. President, as I said, I rise today to introduce the Homestead Preservation Act. This is a commonsense, compassionate place of legislation that is designed to help working families who, through no fault of their own, lose their jobs as a result of international competition. It is a bill to provide displaced workers with access to low-interest loans to help cover monthly home mortgage payments while they are out looking for a job. During the past few months, all Americans have been deluged with grim news of recessions, plummeting consumer confidence, and rising unemployment Clearly, these are uneasy times for everyone in all regions of the country, whether in the South, the Midwest, the Northeast, and out West as well, but particularly in the areas where there are heavy concentrations of manufacturing. The textile and apparel industries have been especially hard hit. That industry is generally in the South and, to some extent, in the Midwest. Nationwide, employment in apparel manufacturing lost more than 10,000 jobs just last month. That is in Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Arkansas, Missouri, and various other States. Factory employment has plummeted in the past year and a half. In Virginia alone, about one out of every six jobs is in manufacturing. But as far as the layoffs, one out of every three layoffs in Virginia is from the manufacturing industry. I am a supporter of fair and free trade. I think trade is good for American consumers. It is good for our retailers and our farmers. I think it is necessary for our businesses and farmers to have opportunities to promote their goods, their products, their services abroad. That allows them to expand and grow. I think NAFTA has created a net increase in employment. As Governor of Virginia, I led several trade missions abroad, whether to Canada, Mexico, various countries in Western and Central Europe, as well as East Asia. We brought back agreements that initially meant over a half a billion dollars in new investment and sales for Virginia products. These investments and sales in Virginia were only made possible by fair and free trade. But while trade is helping our economy as a whole, there are many good, hard-working people and families who have been adversely affected by international competition, particularly in the textile and apparel industries. Any time a factory closes, it is a devastating blow to all of the families and, indeed, all of the businesses in the communities in that region. You can see, with great pride, how communities come together-- close knit communities--and try to help out if a major manufacturer shuts down. I remember back in December 2 years ago--in early December, 1999-- when Tultex shut down. Thousands of jobs were lost. People donated toys to the Salvation Army, though, to make sure Christmas would come to every family. What I am proposing is that the Federal Government does its part to help people through these tough times, so that people and communities are not alone during these transitions. There are already thoughtful programs in place. The NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance Program helps workers get additional job skills in training and employment assistance, as well as provides extended unemployment benefits during job training. These programs are the result of the good, commonsense, logical conclusion that working people can lose their jobs because of trade, not because they did anything wrong or because they did not want to work. They do want to work. We ought to find a way to help ease the stress and turmoil for people whose lives are unexpectedly thrown into transition after years of steady employment with a company that suddenly disappears. Especially in textile areas, you see folks who have worked there for decades; some of their parents may have worked at that same mill or facility. These are hard-working people. They are trying to find employment. But while they are doing so, they should not have to worry about or fear losing their homes. For most people, and most families, their home is the largest investment they will make in their lives. Many have considerable equity built up in their homes that could be lost. Government agencies already have low-interest loan programs in place to help families who have been hit with unexpected disasters--such as a natural disaster, such as a hurricane or a tornado or a flood. Whan a factory closes, it is truly an economic disaster to these families and communities. The effects are just as far reaching and certainly as economically devastating. Like a natural disaster, families displaced by international competition are not responsible for the events leading to those factory closings. The Federal Government ought to make similar disaster loan assistance programs available to our displaced workers. That is the rationale of my introduction of the Homestead Preservation Act. This legislation would provide temporary mortgage assistance to displaced workers, helping them make ends meet during the search for a new job. Specifically, the Homestead Preservation Act authorizes the Department of Labor to administer a low-interest loan program--4 percent--for workers displaced due to international competition. The loan is for up to the amount of 12 monthly home mortgage payments. The program is authorized at $10 million per year for 5 years. It distributes the loan through an account providing a monthly allocation to cover the amount of the worker's home mortgage payment. The loans would be paid or repaid and paid off over 5 years, but no payments would be required until 6 months after the worker has gotten back on his or her feet in gainful employment. The loan would be available only for the cost of the monthly home mortgage payment and covers only those workers displaced due to international competition and who would qualify for the benefits under the NAFTA-TAAP and the transitional adjustment assistance benefits programs. Working within the parameters and the certification and qualifications of the NAFTA-TAAP and the TAA benefits programs, the Homestead Preservation Act recognizes some temporary assistance is needed as workers take time to retrain and be reeducated and expand upon their skills and search for new employment. This will provide, in effect, a bridge loan assistance to these displaced workers. If you look at it, the unemployment benefits are fine, but usually they are not enough to cover the expenses which previously fit within a family budget. Without immediate help, these families, at a minimum, risk ruining their credit ratings and, in the worst case scenario, could lose their car or even their home. The Homestead Preservation Act would provide families with vital temporary financial assistance, enabling them to keep their homes, protect their credit ratings, and, as they work toward strengthening and improving their skills, to continue to be able to search for a job without worrying about losing their homes. They are under a harrowing situation. We ought to have a response to help them. There are many people who need transitional help right away. As we move forward to expand trade opportunities, let's also improve the transitional adjustment assistance programs. The Homestead Preservation Act provides the temporary financial tools necessary for displaced workers to get them back on their feet and to succeed. In my view, it is a very caring, logical and responsible response. I trust my colleagues will agree and support this reasonable, balanced idea. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and the section-by- section analysis be printed in the Record.