H.R. 322House109th Congress (2005-2007)In Committee

Military Retiree Health Care Relief Act of 2005

Legislative Activity

Stay on top of the latest movement without scrolling through every action

1 earlier action

HouseIntro Referral Latest Action

Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Ways and Means Committee

January 25, 2005

View full timeline

HouseIntro Referral

Introduced in House

January 25, 2005

HouseIntro Referral

Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Ways and Means Committee

January 25, 2005

Floor Debate

1 member

What members said about H.R. 322 on the floor

1 Democrat

Rep. Carolyn B. MaloneyD-NY-14 · Jul 20, 2005

Madam Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 31st anniversary of the 1974 illegal Turkish invasion of Cyprus. I have commemorated this day each year since I became a Member of Congress. PSEKA, the…

Madam Speaker, I rise to commemorate the 31st anniversary of the 1974 illegal Turkish invasion of Cyprus.

I have commemorated this day each year since I became a Member of Congress. PSEKA, the International Coordinating Committee, Justice for Cyrus, the Cyprus Federation of America, the World Council of Hellenes Abroad, the Federation of Hellenic Societies are all located in the 14th Congressional District of New York, which I am fortunate to represent.

These organizations believe that peace will come to Cyprus, and they have been strong advocates against the division of Cyprus and the human rights violations perpetrated by the Turkish army in Cyprus. While we must remember this black anniversary, we also need to look to the future. Cyprus' accession to the European Union was an historic achievement. As an EU member, Cyprus represents European values and policies, and at the same time is working toward even stronger transatlantic ties with the United States.

This was a long time in coming, and I believe that Cyprus has much to contribute to the EU. Although all of us,

including the Greek Cypriots and Turkey Cypriots, want to see the division of Cyprus end before its entrance into the EU, the Annan plan for a Cyprus settlement was justly voted down by the Greek Cypriots by an overwhelming 76 percent.

My colleague, the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen), outlined the many reasons why this vote took place.

But we have also heard that many of the residents are working to resolve these disputes and that there is growing strength for a unified Cyprus. A unified Cyprus would promote stability both politically and economically to the entire Mediterranean region. The people of Cyprus deserve a unified and democratic country, and I remain hopeful that a peaceful settlement will be found so that the division of Cyprus will come to an end. Some of us are calling for a special envoy to Cyprus to work towards achieving that end.

However, there have been recent developments that concern me, and I know that they may concern many of my colleagues. Earlier this month, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and I sent a letter, along with 30 other Members of this body, to Secretary of State Rice asking for clarification about U.S. policy toward Cyprus. Specifically, we are seeking answers about the policy of the United States regarding travel directly into the northern occupied parts of Cyprus by U.S. citizens.

While we have not yet heard from the Secretary, I remain hopeful that our relations with Cyprus will remain steadfast and that we will continue to adhere to international treaties and U.N. Security Council resolutions on this issue.

I also want to mention the ongoing issue in Cyprus over property in the northern part of the island. Since Turkey invaded Cyprus, American citizens have been denied access to their property even though they hold titles to that property. I urge my colleagues to support legislation offered by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone), H.R. 857, the American-Owned Property in Occupied Cyprus Claims Act, which would enable U.S. citizens who own property in the Turkish- occupied territory of the Republic of Cyprus to seek financial remedies with either the current inhabitants of their land or the Turkish Government.

Additionally, I have introduced a resolution, H.R. 322, which expresses the sense of the House of Representatives in support of the European Court of Human Rights for its decision in the Loizidou v. Turkey and the Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey cases and for admitting similar cases before the court.

The European Court of Human Rights in 1996 ruled that Turkey must pay Titina Loizidou for denying her access to her property in the occupied part of Cyprus. Earlier this year the European Court of Human Rights decided that a similar case brought by Xenides-Arestis against Turkey was admissible and that Turkey continues to be responsible for what happens in the occupied areas of Cyprus since Turkey exercises effective and overall control through the presence of over 30,000 troops in northern Cyprus.

While I hope that Turkey respects the decisions made by the European Court of Human Rights, I believe that denying property owners access to their land in northern Cyprus is wrong and that steps should be taken immediately to address this issue. Thirty-one years is too long to have a divided country. It is too long to be kept from one's home. It is too long to be separated from one's family. We have seen many tremendous changes around the world. It is time for Cyprus to live in peace and security with full enjoyment of their human rights.

In recognition of the spirit of the people of Cyprus, I ask my colleagues to join me in commemorating the 31st anniversary of the invasion of Cyprus. Long live freedom. Long live Cyprus. Long live Greece. And long live the United States and the friendship between our countries.

Bill Text

Latest available legislative text

Reading Mode

Raw Text PDF XML

Introduced in HouseIssued January 25, 2005

109th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 322

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 25, 2005

Mrs. Emerson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a refundable credit to military retirees for premiums paid for coverage under Medicare Part B.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Military Retiree Health Care Relief Act of 2005.

Premiums paid by military retirees for Medicare part b

(a)

In general

Subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to refundable credits) is amended by redesignating section 36 as section 37 and by inserting after section 35 the following new section:

36.

Premiums paid by military retirees for Medicare part b

(a)

Allowance of credit

In the case of an eligible individual, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the aggregate premiums paid under section 1840 of the Social Security Act by the taxpayer during the taxable year for enrollment of the eligible individual under part B of title XVIII of such Act.

(b)

Eligible individual

For purposes of subsection (a), the term eligible individual means—

(1)

an individual who is entitled to retired or retainer pay based upon service in the uniformed services (as defined in section 101 of title 10, United States Code),

(2)

the spouse (as determined under section 7703) of an individual described in paragraph (1), and

(3)

the widow or widower, as the case may be, of an individual described in paragraph (1).

(b)

Technical amendments

(1)

Paragraph (2) of section 1324(b) of title 31, United States Code, is amended by inserting or from section 36 of such Code before the period at the end.

(2)

The table of sections for subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking the last item and inserting the following new items:

Sec. 36. Premiums paid by military retirees for medicare part B

Sec. 37. Overpayments of tax

(c)

Effective date

(1)

In general

The amendments made by this section shall apply to expenses incurred after December 31, 1998.

(2)

Waiver of limitations

If the credit or refund of any overpayment of tax resulting from the application of section 36 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (as added by this section) to a period before the date of enactment of this Act is prevented as of such date by the operation of any law or rule of law (including res judicata), such credit or refund may nevertheless be allowed or made if the claim therefor is filed before the close of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.