Bills in Congress the week of Monday May 6th 2013

---

S.601 Water Resources Development Act of 2013

Sponsored by Sen. Barabra Boxer (D-CA)

The bill would authorize Army Corp of Engineers to construct water projects for mitigating storm damage, restoring ecosystems, and reducing erosion on inland and intra-coastal waterways. The legislation would also authorize the agency to establish grant programs to assist local and state governments with levee safety and rehabilitation programs, and would also authorize the Environmental and Protection Agency (EPA) to provide loans or loan guarantees to complete infrastructure projects.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, S. 601 would cost about $5.7 billion over the 2014-2018 period. Spending would continue from amounts authorized to be appropriated under the bill after 2018, and the CBO estimates that such spending would total $6.5 billion over the 2019-2023 period.

Supporters of the bill

Supporters of the bill include national construction organizations, including construction, public works, surveyors, and architectural organizations, as well as state-specific contractors associations and Chambers of Commerce. Supporters of the bill say the legislation would provide critical flood protection for communities across the countries, maintain the flow of commerce, and create up to 500,000 new jobs.

Opponents of the bill

Opponents of the bill include fiscal conservative groups and some environmental groups. Opponents are critical of the bill’s high levels of spending and its use of federal tax revenue to pay for state and local projects. In addition, some environmental groups say the bill decreases oversight of the Corp of Engineers by preventing public and other agencies to influence Corp of Engineers projects, and its provision on requirements for environmental reviews – which supporters say streamlines the process – would allow the Corp of Engineers to bypass some environmental checks.

The bill had strong bipartisan support coming out of the Environment and Public Works Committee.

For further information:

Full text of S. 601: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113s601rs/pdf/BILLS-113s601rs.pdf

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/s601.pdf

 

S.743 Marketplace Fairness Act of 2013

Sponsored by Sen. Michael Enzi (R-WY)

Summary– The bill would give states the authority to tax sales made online and by other remote out-of-state merchants, such as catalogue retailers. States would be able to require remote retailers with annual remote sales of over $1 million to remit tax back to the state.  The Act would also require states to simplify their sales tax systems and provide information and free software to sellers.

Voting will include one bipartisan amendment that would require states to give a six-month warning before implementing its authority and collecting the tax. The bill’s current form requires states to give a three-month notice.

Supporters

Supporters of the bill include the National Conference of State Legislatures, National Retail Federation, American Independent Business Alliance, American Federation of Labor, and the Congress of Industrial Organizations, among others.

Supporters say the legislation will modernize federal and state understanding of sales tax laws so that they can keep current with real-world change in the marketplace. Supporters also say:

• The legislation would level the playing field for all sellers regardless of the medium used to conduct sales
• States would have to simplify their tax laws in order to make multistate sales tax collection easier than it has been in the past
• The legislation will help many states now facing significant budget shortfalls

Opponents

Opponents of the bill include multiple fiscal conservative organizations, including the R Street Institute, Heritage Action for America, Americans for Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, Institute for Policy Innovation, and the National Taxpayers Union, among others. Opponents to the bill also say:

• The bill would result in an expansion in state tax collection authority by eliminating the “physical presence standard,” which dictates that a state can only require a business to collect its sales tax if it is physically present within its boundaries
• The legislation ignores the bedrock principle of tax policy that states not be permitted to extend their taxation and regulatory authorities beyond their borders
• Small companies will be unfairly burdened by the additional obligations of complying with more jurisdictions sales and tax use laws

The Marketplace Fairness Act was previously voted on as an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution, where it passed by a bipartisan vote of 75-24. The bill is expected to pass the Senate, and it will then be considered by the House of Representatives.

For further information:
Text of S. 3525   http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:S.3525:

 

H.R. 807 – Full Faith and Credit Act

Sponsored by Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA)

Summary– H.R. 807 would allow government to borrow money beyond the amount specified by the statutory debt limit in order to avoid default if the government hits its borrowing authority limit, but only to pay off interest on the national debt or the Social Security trust fund. The federal government is scheduled to reach the debt limit on May 18. If the debt limit is reached, the Department of the Treasury would be able to borrow money from several trust funds in order to avoid default. The Treasury would provide a weekly report to the House Committee on Ways and Means and Senate Committee on Finance outlining the exempted transactions until a new debt limit is enacted. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill would result in no costs or savings to the federal government, because it would not change any of the government’s tax or spending policies.

Supporters of the bill say it ensures that new revenues would first be used to pay down the nation’s debt, and would protect American pension funds from being undermined in the event of a fiscal stalemate in Washington.  According to Rep. Tom McClintock, the bill’s sponsor, this would strengthen and protect the nation’s credit by assuring that debt elimination is the first priority on incoming revenues.

Opponents of the bill say that by focusing first on the nation’s debt – which is held by largely by foreign investors – the bill prioritizes paying individuals in other countries instead of paying for domestic programs that should receive the first priority for new revenue streams.

In general, Republicans favor and Democrats oppose the bill. The Ways and Means Committee passed the bill along party lines. Democrats in the Senate are expected to vote down the legislation if it passes the House.

 

For further information:

Full text of H.R. 807 http://beta.congress.gov/113/bills/hr807/113hr807ih.pdf

Remarks by Congressman Tom McClintock, Sponsor of H.R. 807 http://mcclintock.house.gov/2013/04/protecting-americas-full-faith-and-credit.shtml

Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate:

http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/hr807.pdf

H.R. 1406 – Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013

Sponsored by Rep. Martha Roby (R-AL)

The bill would amend the current law to provide an option for compensatory time-off instead of overtime pay for employees in the private sector, similar to options now available for employees in the public-sector. Under the Fair Labor Standard Act of 1938, private-sector employees who work more than 40 hours in a work week are compensated at time-and-a-half for each additional hour worked. Public-sector employees have the option of using overtime for compensatory time off. The bill would allow private-sector employees the option to receive the same compensatory time of at least one and one-half hours for each additional hour of employment instead of overtime pay, up to 160 hours a year. Such time could be provided only in accordance with a collective bargaining agreement or with the consent of affected employees, and the bill would include a “cash out” option for unused time off as an additional protection to employees. The changes would be effective for five years after enactment of the bill.

The bill’s supporters say that the “cash out” protections and the written agreement provision would protect private-sector workers and provide equal benefits as public-sector counterparts. Critics of the bill say they are still concerned that the law could allow employers to unfairly exploit low-wage workers by requiring long work weeks without compensation.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, enacting H.R. 1406 would not affect direct spending or revenues. The bill is expected to pass in House and receive some measure of support in the Senate.

For further information:

Full text of H.R. 1406 Working Flexibility Act of 2013: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-113hr1406rh/pdf/BILLS-113hr1406rh.pdf

Congressional Budget Office Report: http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/hr1406.pdf

 

S. 743 Marketplace Fairness Act

Sponsored by Sen. Michael Enzi (R-WY)

Summary– The bill would give states the authority to tax sales made online. Specifically, states would be able to require remote retailers that conduct virtual sales to collect and remit tax back to the state.  

Supporters of the bill include the National Conference of State Legislatures, National Retail Federation, American Independent Business Alliance, American Federation of Labor, and the Congress of Industrial Organizations, among others. Supporters say the legislation will modernize federal and state understanding of sales tax laws so that they can keep current with real-world change in the marketplace. Additional reasons for support include:

• The legislation would level the playing field for all sellers regardless of the medium used to conduct sales
• States would have to simplify their tax laws in order to make multistate sales tax collection easier than it has been in the past
• The legislation will help many states now facing significant budget shortfalls

Opponents of the bill include multiple fiscal conservative organizations, including the R Street Institute, Heritatge Action for America, Americans for Prosperity, Americans for Tax Reform, Institute for Policy Inovation, and the National Taxpayers Union, among others. Reasons for opposition include:

• The bill would result in an expansion in state tax collection authority by eliminating the “physical presence standard,” which dictates that a state can only require a business to collect its sales tax if it is physically present within its boundaries
• The legislation ignores the bedrock principle of tax policy that states not be permitted to extend their taxation and regulatory authorities beyond their borders

The Marketplace Fairness Act was previously voted on as an amendment to the Senate Budget Resolution, where it passed by a bipartisan vote of 75-24. However, Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus (D-MT) voted against the amendment in March due to concerns over the bill. This raises the significance of the cloture vote on Monday: if the Senate votes to invoke cloture, the bill will be brought to the floor for votes and circumvent potential opposition from Sen. Baucus and the Senate Finance Committee.

 

For additional information:

Text of S. 3525   http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:S.3525: