Donald Manzullo

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to show my strong support for the amendment put forth by my friend and the ranking member of the Committee on Small Business, Ms. Velazquez, which I chair. I join with Ms. Velazquez in offering this amendment because it will strengthen an already good bill by requiring that 20 percent of the federal workers be placed with small businesses in the private sector. Under current law, 23 percent of federal procurement must be awarded to small businesses. Given that, it is entirely reasonable that 20 percent of the federal workers should be placed with small businesses. Moreover, the high tech field is overwhelmingly dominated by small businesses. It not only makes sense that at least 20 percent of the government workers taking part in this exchange should be assigned to this sector. This is not a burdensome provision. This amendment will further allow government workers the opportunity to experience the private sector and fully understand particularly the most dynamic-charged entrepreneurial spirit which fuels our economy-- our nation's small businesses. It will afford federal employees the prospect to view first-hand the impact of government regulations upon business. This amendment will provide federal workers the rare chance to ``walk in another's shoes'' and see a totally different perspective. Congress has repeatedly passed legislation that mandates that the government review the impact of legislation and the promulgation of regulations upon small business. This amendment would provide another vehicle to protect small businesses from our government by ensuring that federal workers understand the unique position that our entrepreneurs are in. Please join me in supporting the Velazquez amendment that will only improve and strengthen the Digital Tech Corps Act.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to applaud President Bush for recently releasing a comprehensive Small Business Agenda. The President's Small Business Agenda includes substantive and vital tax and regulatory reforms including, among them, provisions to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for an immediate increase in expensing under Section 179. Accordingly, I rise today to introduce a bill, the ``Small Business Investment in Growth Act of 2002,'' identical to the President's expensing provisions and to legislation introduced in the Senate on Friday, March 15, 2002, by Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Kit Bond of Missouri. As Chairman of the Committee on Small Business, I strongly welcome the Job Creation and Worker Assistance Act of 2002 Congress passed and the President signed last month to stimulate growth and promote prosperity for all Americans. Unfortunately, the final bill did not include small business expensing--a priority I believe would be crucial in increasing small business investment and growth in our economy. Accordingly, my bill would increase immediately the expensing and equipment cost limitations under Section 179 of the Internal Revenue Code to $40,000 and $325,000 respectively. Unambiguously, these simple and cost effective changes would boost small business spending and economic growth. Small entrepreneurs strongly support the proposed changes because they understand that the current law limitations of $24,000 and $200,000 are woefully outdated and counterproductive. The majority of small entrepreneurs exceed these current annual cost limits in only three months. Increasing Section 179 expensing for America's small entities will lower their cost of capital and enable them to compete, to expand, and to create new jobs. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to offer this bipartisan bill together with the Committee on Small Business Ranking Democrat Nydia M. Velazquez of New York, Representative Rob Portman of Ohio and of the Ways and Means Committee, and several other distinguished members. We urge its prompt passage in this Congress.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of S. 2019, which will give us another month to work out the remaining details with Ex-Im's reauthorization. I represent Rockford, Illinois, which in 1981 led the Nation in unemployment at 25.9 percent. More people were unemployed in Rockford then proportionally than during the so-called Great Depression. Rockford is about 35 or 36 percent manufacturing base, compared to most cities, which are half of that. There are about 60 companies in the district that I represent, and hundreds of sub-subcontractors, that comprise the $232 million dollars worth of products that they sell to Boeing Corporation, a so-called multinational corporation. Of course they are multinational corporations. They make airplanes. Those are big companies. But a corporation is composed of the people that work for it, the labor union that works there at Hamilton Sundstrand that supplies $232 million worth of products, and the 60 other small business people and the hundreds of unknown sub-subcontractors. Ex-Im Bank makes possible millions of dollars for small business people, many of whom do not even know their products are going into an aircraft that has been sold by a ``multinational corporation'' which somehow is supposed to be the cynosure of evil in this Nation. That is what Ex-Im Bank does. It tries to level the playing field in this highly competitive, unfair world, so that American manufacturers can compete on a level playing field with manufacturers from other countries. That is what Ex-Im Bank does. That is the whole purpose of it. In fact, Ex-Im Bank makes jobs in the United States. Ex-Im Bank makes jobs in the United States. Let me say it three times. Ex-Im Bank makes jobs in the United States. Were it not for the Ex-Im Bank, Boeing would not be as competitive, and thousands of people would be laid off in the congressional district that I represent. Those are the facts as to the relationship between Ex-Im Bank and so-called large multinational corporations. But I am also chairman of the Committee on Small Business, and I agree that Ex-Im Bank has to reach out to help small business exporters. The number of small business exporters has more than tripled over the past decade. They comprise 97 percent of all U.S. exporters. Last year, 86 percent of their transactions and 18 percent of the dollar volume of Ex-Im went to small businesses, and it continues to rise. I would therefore urge my colleagues to support S. 2019 and work over the next month to come up with a final bill.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, due to a family health emergency, I was unable to be present for rollcall vote number 5 on Tuesday, January 29, 2002. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, of the many Federal regulations with which colleges and universities are required to comply, one of the most onerous is that associated with the HOPE scholarship and lifetime learning tax credit. Originally enacted as part of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, the tax credits were intended to give parents back more of their hard-earned money, up to $1,500 for the first 2 years of college, so that they could better afford to send their children to school. While we were successful in providing, this tax relief for students and families, we discovered an unintended consequence: an unfunded mandate burdening, colleges, trade schools, community colleges, and universities in the form of a reporting requirement administered by the IRS. I became aware of this regulatory issue during the fall of 1997. I was discussing several concerns with Dr. La Tourette, president of Northern Illinois University. While talking about the merits of the HOPE scholarship, he dropped the bombshell on me and informed us of the new Federal requirements forcing all 6,000 institutions of higher education in this country to collect unprecedented information on their students and disseminate that information to the IRS. I knew compliance with the reporting requirement would be expansive and expensive and would ultimately be borne by the very families that they were trying to help with the HOPE scholarship program. Both large and small institutions have been hit hard by the reporting requirement. The cost to schools to implement and abide by these regulations will soar into the hundreds of millions of dollars. And, of course, they will be passed on to the consumers of education, which are the parents and the students. Since my conversation with Dr. La Tourette, I have worked with members of the higher education community and with Commissioner Charles Rossotti of the IRS to simplify the reporting requirements and ease the burden of the regulations on the colleges and universities of this country. Today, I am proud to say that H.R. 3346 is the product of a partnership that evolved between the IRS, the Treasury Department, the higher education community, and myself, and this can serve as a model for how we can positively impact higher education in the future by working together. Specifically, while H.R. 3346 maintains the reporting requirement, the bill eliminates certain elements of the law such as reporting a third party's Social Security number, and changes others, such as allowing schools to report the amount students are billed or the amount they are paid. It is my hope that the simplifications instituted as part of H.R. 3346 will make the reporting significantly easier on colleges and universities. Early estimates from Northern Illinois University predict that as a result of the passage of this bill, this school could avoid a one-time cost of approximately $90,000. This includes the costs of program computer systems to accommodate requirements included in the original legislation that are not included in the pending legislation, as well as what it would cost initially to implement Social Security number reporting of the taxpayer claiming the student as a dependent. Additionally, the university would have incurred ongoing costs on an annual basis for solicitation and data entry of the student-reported information, and those costs are estimated at $30,000 a year. The University of California's system expects to save $1 million in the first year alone as a result of H.R. 3346. Overall, the savings the schools will attain as a result of this legislation are very significant. When we consider that most institutions of higher education would incur costs of similar proportion, the impact is particularly traumatic. I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to heartily thank Commissioner Rossotti with whom we met on no less than three different occasions in order to fashion this legislation. I also want to thank Judy Dunn, Curt Wilson and Beverly Babers of the staff. I would like to thank Northern Illinois University, both former president Dr. La Tourette and current president Dr. John Peters and Kathe Shinham from the school for their insights and efforts as we have worked to craft this legislation. This bill is a memorial to Dr. Ruth Mercedes-Smith, former president of Highland Community College, who was killed in a car accident several months ago. Her support for our work was invaluable. Also, Dr. Chapdelaine of Rock Valley Community College, Dr. LaVista of McHenry Community College, Jacquelyn Ito-Woo of the University of California, and Mary Bachinger and Anne Gross of the National Association of Colleges and University Business Officers. All of these groups worked tirelessly together in order to craft the legislation. It took us 4 years to do it. During that period of time, the IRS worked with us, they withheld the implementation of these regulations because they knew that the goal was worthy. Lastly, I want to thank Sarah Giddens of our staff who, for 4 years, tirelessly worked on this legislation, dogging it dot by dot, i by i, in the hundreds of meetings, literally, that she had and the hours that she poured into this piece of legislation. Mr. Speaker, it is a great piece of legislation. Instead of spending money on regulatory compliance, the schools can spend that money doing what they do best, and that is educating the kids.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous matters on this legislation.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to keep venture capital flowing to small businesses during this critical time to our Nation's economic recovery. The main purpose of S. 1196 is to adjust the fees charged to participate in security SBICs from 1 percent to 1.38 percent. This change is necessary because there is no funding for the participating securities SBICs program. The other provision of S. 1196 modestly lowers the fees in the other main access to capital programs of the SBA, the 7(a) General Business Loan Program and the 504 Certified Development Company CDC program. Last month the SBA administrator sent me a letter in support of this and revitalized the 7(a) and 504 programs. Mr. Speaker, the text of that letter is as follows: U.S. Small Business Administration, Washington, DC, November 27, 2001. The Hon. Donald Manzullo, Chairman, Committee on Small Business, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: The purpose of this letter is to express the U.S. Small Business Administration's (SBA) views on S. 1196, the Small Business Investment Company (SBIC) Amendments Act of 2001. SBA applauds the Congress on passing the President's proposed legislation that enables the SBIC Participating Securities Program to flourish and expand without additional discretionary appropriations. SBA also applauds the Congress for including the technical amendments that were included in the President's proposal to further enhance the program. SBA agrees with the concept that we must revitalize the 7(a) and 504 programs. Over the past several years the number of loans to women, Hispanic, African American, and veteran small business owners has either decreased or remained relatively flat. Furthermore, these groups receive a low percentage of the loans, with women receiving 21 percent, Hispanics 8 percent, African Americans 4 percent, and veterans 11 percent. More than 60 percent of the loans made to women, Hispanics and African Americans, the fastest growing small business population, are less than $150,000. In addition, most businesses are started with less than $150,000. Yet the legislation fails to specifically target fee reduction in 7(a) loans of $150,000 or less. SBA feels very strongly that because of limited resources, and the statistics set forth above, that fee reductions should be targeted to those small businesses seeking loans under $150,000. The Office of Management and Budget advises that there is no objection from the standpoint of the President's program to the submission of these views for the consideration of Congress. SBA welcomes the opportunity to work with Congress to revitalize the 7(a) and 504 programs for the benefit of small businesses. Sincerely, Hector V. Barreto, Administrator. Mr. Barreto suggested that any fee reduction should be weighted to smaller loan borrowers and I agree. That is why I concur with the Senate's action that makes a few changes to House Amendment 7(a) Program. I rise in support of S. 1196 and concur with the Senate to House amendment and I urge my colleagues to support these needed changes to these SBA programs. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to S. 1196, to amend the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and for other purposes.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, 10 years ago a patriot from Freeport, Illinois, named Dan Steele went off to war in Iraq to fight for the American people and protect the freedoms this country has known for over 200 years. During the buildup in the Gulf, Dan's leg was fractured by an Iraqi soldier's apparent suicide attack. Over the next 8 years, Dan suffered from various conditions shared by many other soldiers who fought in the Gulf War. In May of 1999, Dan succumbed to his illness and passed away. The county coroner listed Gulf War syndrome as a secondary cause of death on his death certificate. Shortly after Dan's funeral, we contacted his widow, Donna. She vowed to Dan that she would do whatever she could to help other Gulf War veterans suffering from mysterious ailments. Her story moved me to introduce legislation to compensate our suffering Gulf War veterans, H.R. 612, the Persian Gulf War Illness Compensation Act. H.R. 612 which I introduced along with the gentleman from California (Mr. Gallegly) and the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Shows) has the support of 228 Members of the House and all the major veterans organizations. A companion bill was introduced in the Senate by Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas. I am pleased to announce that significant portions of H.R. 612 are included in this benefits package before us today. I want to thank the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Smith) and members of the Veterans Affairs Committee for their willingness to work with us to strengthen the part of this bill that provides enhanced benefits for our ailing Gulf War veterans. These provisions will allow more sick veterans to qualify for compensation by expanding the number of eligible illness and codifying 13 possible symptoms. Earlier this year, with full Congressional support, the VA extended by 5 years the time period during which these symptoms may arise. I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 1291. It goes a long way towards fulfilling the promises we have made to our veterans.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, as we debate trade authority, let's not forget the fastest growing and most exciting segment of American exporters--our small business exporters. Trade Promotion Authority surely will assist our negotiators in lowering barriers for this most promising engine of our exporting industries. Small businesses and family farmers in America will especially benefit from new trade agreements because exporting is the only sure way they can do business overseas. With Trade Promotion Authority, the President can more quickly ink foreign trade deals that will give our small businesses new markets to sell their goods and services. The role of small business in our domestic economy is well documented. America's 25 million-plus small companies are the backbone of our economy. They create three of every four new jobs, produce most innovations, and generate over half of the nation's private gross domestic product. The role of small business in international trade is less well known. In fact, small businesses account for nearly 97 percent of the total number of all U.S. exporters. The number of small business exporters has tripled over the past decade or so, increasing to over 224,000 small businesses directly involved in exporting. Small businesses now account for 29 percent of total merchandise export sales spread throughout every industrial classification. What is more surprising is that the fastest growth among small business exporters has been with companies employing fewer than 20 employees. These very small businesses represented 69 percent of all exporting companies in 1999. Obviously, trade is essential to their future and to all they employ-- particularly at a time when our economy is facing difficulties. That's why groups like the Small Business Exporters Association has strongly endorsed H.R. 3005. Please find enclosed a copy of their letter to me. Our nation also is poised to expand its exports in services, which is the fastest growing sector of our economy and one in which small firms thrive. In fact, the service sector accounts for 80 percent of U.S. Gross Domestic Product and U.S. employment--83 million jobs. These service jobs are good paying jobs--their average annual income of $32,865 a year slightly exceeds the average annual income of manufacturing jobs. Although we in Congress tend to think of trade primarily in terms of goods, our services trade is where we have our competitive edge. The U.S. is the world's largest exporter of services--services such as telecommunications and information technology, insurance, securities, banking and funds management, energy, legal and educational services, accounting, express delivery, travel and tourism. This sector has created more than 20 million new jobs since 1998, generates a $76.5 billion annual trade surplus, and provides the greatest opportunity to increase American prosperity through international trade. To capitalize on our competitive edge and gain the benefits in economic prosperity and jobs, we need to remove the many kinds of complex barriers that now block our trade. In my own district in northern Illinois, small manufacturers are learning that if they want to remain in business they must begin tapping new markets in Canada, Mexico, and overseas. In 1999, the Rockford metropolitan area exported $857.2 million worth of goods and services, an increase of 64 percent since 1993, to practically every area of the world. As exporting opportunities become known, northern Illinois small and family owned businesses are taking advantage of them. For example, a tool and die business with 40 employees attended a successful trade mission to Mexico with the Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration. Despite these encouraging statistics and trends, there is much more work to do. While small business exporters have more than tripled in number, they still form less than one percent of all small businesses in the United States. Even among these cutting-edge small firms, nearly two-thirds sold to just one foreign market in 1999. In fact, 76 percent of small business exporters sold less than $250,000 worth of goods abroad. In other words, many of these small firms are ``casual'' exporters. The key is to encourage more small businesses to enter the trade arena and then to prod the ``casual'' small business exporters into becoming more active. If we were able to move in this direction, it could boost our exports by several billion dollars. We need to get these engines of our domestic economic growth fully engaged in the global marketplace. Hopefully, when Trade Promotion Authority is returned from the other chamber, it will contain a provision to create an Assistant United States Trade Representative for Small Business. Trade barriers are insurmountable for small business. While most large companies can either export or set up a factory overseas, most small business exporters have only one choice--that is to export from America. In addition, there are many complicated issues that face small business exporters, such as streamlining foreign customs practices. Trade Promotion Authority will give the President the tools he needs to negotiate away these unfair trade barriers. Trade Promotion Authority has been granted to the last six American Presidents. It simply gives the President the ability to negotiate trade agreements in a timely fashion. Once a trade deal is inked, the House and Senate have 90 days to approve it on an up or down vote. Under the version considered today, Congress will be more involved than ever in foreign trade deals because the bill creates a Congressional Oversight Group to oversee negotiations and consult with the Administration throughout the process. Currently, more than 134 trade agreements exist in the world and the United States is party to only two of them. Trade Promotion Authority would help the President open new markets to American products, knocking down unfair tariffs and foreign trade practices and preserving and creating more high-paying jobs in the United States. American jobs that involve exporting pay 13 to 18 percent more than other jobs. Expanded trade is needed now more than ever. In these tough economic times, American workers need work. This legislation will not only preserve jobs, but it will give our employers new markets to increase their business so they can put unemployed Americans back to work where they belong. Economic studies show that a new World Trade Organization (WTO) round would produce enormous benefits for the United States. If the round reduced existing tariffs and all service barriers by one-third, it has the potential to add $177 billion to the U.S. economy. Removal of all trade barriers would add $537 billion to the U.S. economy, $450 billion of which would be from services. Services and agricultural negotiations need to be re-energized by a successful new trade round. Nothing would assist American success in these talks, and continuing bilateral and multilateral negotiations, than the passage of Trade Promotion Authority. Without a new round, these negotiations will run out of steam, and our companies, economy, and job-creation potential will suffer. Renewing TPA will show our trading partners that we have the political will to start and conclude serious negotiations. I urge my colleagues' support of H.R. 3005. Small Business Exporters Association, Washington, DC, December 5, 2001. Rep. Don Manzullo, House Small Business Committee, 2361 Rayburn House Office Building, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Rep. Manzullo: As the Chairman of the House Small Business Committee, you are one of Congress, most committed advocates of small business growth and prosperty. The Small Business Exporters Association urges you to act on that commitment tomorrow--by voting for Trade Promotion Authority for this and future Presidents. This issue is sometimes seen as a struggle between the priorities of big business and big labor. It is anything but. As the nation's oldest and largest association dedicated exclusively to small and mid-size US exporters, SBEA is hearing loud and clear from its members that TPA may well make or break their ability to compete globally. Though the number of small business exporters in the US has tripled, reaching more than 200,000, smaller exporters face huge new challenges, and our progress is at risk. The high cost of the dollar in foreign currencies and the worldwide economic softening have dealt serious blows to our ability to sell abroad. We're also losing customers as free trade agreements spread around the world--without the US--and our products grow more expensive as a result. Big businesses can deal with the high dollar and the free trade agreements by shifting production overseas. Small business can't. Price us out of a market and we're out. America loses the sales, jobs and economic growth. The vote on TPA tomorrow will send a powerful signal-- whether Congress intends to strengthen a strategic growth area of the American economy, or accentuate a downward economic spiral. SBEA understands that compromises will be necessary in the months ahead. There are many interests affected by US trade agreements. We support those compromises. But a vote against TPA is not a vote for compromise. It is a vote to end the discussion. We hope that you will stand with small business tomorrow. Regards, James Morrison.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2538) to amend the Small Business Act to expand and approve the assistance provided by Small Business Development Centers to Indian tribe members, Native Alaskans, and Native Hawaiians, as amended.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I want to acknowledge the work of my colleagues on the Committee on Resources, in particular the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Hansen). They contributed immensely to this bill in order to make sure that we are helping as many native Americans as possible, and particularly in clarifying the language as it applies to Alaska natives. I thank them for their contribution to this important legislation. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join with my good friend, the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall), in offering this bill today. While many Americans are justifiably anxious about a one-half percent jump in the unemployment rate, about 60 percent of our Native American population lives in or adjacent to Indian lands that suffer from an average unemployment rate of 45 percent. This past summer I had the opportunity to visit Santa Fe in the heart of the district of the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Udall); and at that time we held a hearing involving the contracting practices of one of our labs out there, the Los Alamos lab. The evidence adduced at the hearing pointed out quite significantly that the Native American tribes are not getting their share of the amount of Federal dollars that are being poured into the Los Alamos facility. One of the purposes of this bill is to extend the facilities of the SBCDs, the Small Business Development Centers, of which there are over 1,000 in this country, for the purpose of business counseling and technical assistance to the Native Americans who may wish to become involved in the procurement process. What is good about this bill, Mr. Speaker, is the fact that this is a self-help program, it involves the outlay of a relatively small amount of money, it is aimed directly at the Native Americans that really need the assistance, and it is the type of learning of business techniques that makes the Native Americans better able to compete to go after these Federal contracts and in the private sector. So I join in the support of this bill and would encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 2538. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 2538.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Speaker, of the many Federal regulations with which colleges and universities are required to comply, one of the most onerous is that associated with the HOPE scholarship and lifetime learning tax credit. Originally enacted as part of the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, the tax credits were intended to give parents back more of their hard-earned money, up to $1,500 for the first 2 years of college, so that they could better afford to send their children to school. While we were successful in providing this tax relief for students and families, we discovered an unintended consequence: an unfunded mandate burdening colleges, trade schools, community colleges, and universities in the form of a reporting requirement administered by the IRS. I became aware of this regulatory issue during the fall of 1997. I was discussing several concerns with Dr. La Tourette, president of Northern Illinois University. While talking about the merits of the HOPE scholarship, he dropped the bombshell on me and informed us of the new Federal requirements forcing all 6,000 institutions of higher education in this country to collect unprecedented information on their students and disseminate that information to the IRS. I knew compliance with the reporting requirement would be expansive and expensive and would ultimately be borne by the very families that they were trying to help with the HOPE scholarship program. Both large and small institutions have been hit hard by the reporting requirement. The cost to schools to implement and abide by these regulations will soar into the hundreds of millions of dollars. And, of course, they will be passed on to the consumers of education, which are the parents and the students. Since my conversation with Dr. La Tourette, I have worked with members of the higher education community and with Commissioner Charles Rossotti of the IRS to simplify the reporting requirements and ease the burden of the regulations on the colleges and universities of this country. Today, I am proud to say that H.R. 3346 is the product of a partnership that evolved between the IRS, the Treasury Department, the higher education community, and myself, and this can serve as a model for how we can positively impact higher education in the future by working together. Specifically, while H.R. 3346 maintains the reporting requirement, the bill eliminates certain elements of the law such as reporting a third party's Social Security number, and changes others, such as allowing schools to report the amount students are billed or the amount they are paid. It is my hope that the simplifications instituted as part of H.R. 3346 will make the reporting significantly easier on colleges and universities. Early estimates from Northern Illinois University predict that as a result of the passage of this bill, this school could avoid a one-time cost of approximately $90,000. This includes the costs of program computer systems to accommodate requirements included in the original legislation that are not included in the pending legislation, as well as what it would cost initially to implement Social Security number reporting of the taxpayer claiming the student as a dependent. Additionally, the university would have incurred ongoing costs on an annual basis for solicitation and data entry of the student-reported information, and those costs are estimated at $30,000 a year. The University of California's system expects to save $1 million in the first year alone as a result of H.R. 3346. Overall, the savings the schools will attain as a result of this legislation are very significant. When we consider that most institutions of higher education would incur costs of similar proportion, the impact is particularly traumatic. I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to heartily thank Commissioner Rossotti with whom we met on no less than three different occasions in order to fashion this legislation. I also want to thank Curt Wilson and Beverly Babers of the staff. I would like to thank Northern Illinois University, both former president Dr. La Tourette and current president Dr. John Peters and Kathe Shineham from the school for their insights and efforts as we have worked to craft this legislation. This bill is a memorial to Dr. Ruth Mercedes-Smith, former president of Highland Community College, who was killed in a car accident several months ago. Her support for our work was invaluable. Also, Dr. Chapdelaine of Rock Valley Community College and Dr. LaVista of McHenry Community College, and the National Association of Colleges and Universities Business Offices. All of these groups worked tirelessly together in order to craft the legislation. It took us 4 years to do it. During that period of time, the IRS worked with us, they withheld the implementation of these regulations because they knew that the goal was worthy. Lastly, I want to thank Sarah Giddens of our staff who, for 4 years, tirelessly worked on this legislation, dogging it dot by dot, i by i, in the hundreds of meetings, literally, that she had and the hours that she poured into this piece of legislation. Mr. Speaker, it is a great piece of legislation. Instead of spending money on regulatory compliance, the schools can spend that money doing what they do best, and that is educating the kids.

Mr. MANZULLO

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, it is questionable as to whether it does or not. I am sure the Committee on Appropriations will state that it does; and I will state that it does not for the record, and I will probably lose. That is correct.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I am finished.

Mr. MANZULLO. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, this amendment strikes sections 202 and section 201 and section 202. Section 202 violates House rule XXI by authorizing in an appropriations bill, and it is the same argument with section 201. I would ask for the support of the Committee on Appropriations on this.

Mr. MANZULLO. Mr. Chairman, I offer amendments en bloc.

Mr. MANZULLO. I would withdraw my remarks, and ask unanimous consent that the amendments that we have striking sections 201 and 202 be considered en bloc, and then we could return later to the first one which I was addressing.

Mr. MANZULLO. I am not addressing that. There are three amendments.