To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the election to include combat pay as earned income for purposes of the earned income tax credit and penalty-free distributions from retirement plans to individuals called to active duty, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

(Mr. REYNOLDS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague, the gentleman from Connecticut, has outlined a number of provisions in this bill, we come together today not as Democrats or Republicans, but as Americans. We are united in our respect for those who wear the uniform of the United States Armed Forces, and we are united in our desire to ensure that Federal programs within the Ways and Means Committee's jurisdiction from the Tax Code to the SSI program work effectively for members of the military, veterans, first responders and their families.

Let me begin by also thanking Chairman Rangel and Ranking Member McCrery, as well as Chairman Neal, Chairman McDermott, and Ranking Members English and Weller, for their outstanding leadership in crafting this legislation. This bill is a great example of what we can accomplish when we put our differences aside and work together. I am hopeful that the revisions we are making to this legislation today will be taken up in short order by the other body.

I would also like to highlight two specific provisions in the bill that have been of particular interest to me during my time in Congress. The first provision, section 202, is modeled on legislation, the Blind Veterans Fairness Act, that I first introduced in the year 2000. My legislation would correct a problem in the Federal SSI rules and affects blind veterans in four States, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts, that provide these veterans modest annuities in recognition of the substantial sacrifice they have made to serving our country.

Regrettably, under current Federal law, these State annuities actually reduce any SSI payments for which blind veterans would otherwise be eligible. As we heard from Michelle LaRock of our New York City's Division of Veterans Affairs at our Ways and Means hearing in October, this quirk in the Federal SSI rules creates a hardship not only for the affected veterans themselves, but for the States that administer these annuity programs as well. As in years past, the bill I introduced in the 110th Congress, H.R. 649, has enjoyed bipartisan support.

Let me turn briefly to a separate provision, section 107 of the bill, which will permanently allow penalty-free withdrawals from IRAs, 401(k)s, and other retirement funds for Reservists and National Guardsmen called to active duty. As we all know, when Guardsmen and Reservists are called up from our States, they often face significant reductions in pay compared to their civilian salaries, put an economic strain on their families. To lessen this economic hardship, many of them

choose to draw down on their retirement funds.

Unfortunately, under prior law, they faced a 10 percent ``early withdrawal tax'' when they did so, and they faced restrictions on making repayments to their retirement funds upon returning from active duty. Last year's Pension Protection Act provided relief from this 10 percent penalty tax and permitted unlimited repayments within 2 years after leaving active duty, but only for Guardsmen and Reservists called to active duty before December 31, 2007.

To ensure that this important relief remains available on a permanent basis going forward, I introduced H.R. 867, the Guardsmen and Reservists' Tax Fairness Act on February 7 of this year. This legislation has also attracted a bipartisan group of cosponsors, as well as endorsements from several leading veterans service organizations.

Mr. Speaker, we recently got a great reminder of the time-sensitivity of this particular provision from the area I represent in Western New York. Just days ago, it was announced that 100 members of the 107th Air Refueling Wing, stationed at Niagara Falls Air Reserve Station, will be deployed to the Middle East in January as part of the global war on terror. Unless this tax benefit is made permanent, these brave men and women, and countless more just like them across the country, will lose their eligibility simply because the calendar has flipped to 2008 before their date of deployment.

I sincerely hope that our colleagues on the other side of the Capitol will recognize the urgency of this issue and ensure that the provision is sent to the President's desk before adjourning for the year.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California, Mr. Herger, a very senior member of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran).

Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with the gentleman from New Jersey, our distinguished member from Ways and Means. This is a bipartisan piece of legislation. As both the manager of the bill, Mr. Larson of Connecticut, has outlined and as I have outlined, as we share strong support and we put Democrat and Republican views aside, and represented clearly what is best for America as we deal with our veterans and as we deal with our firefighters. And so both sides of the aisle today join strongly in a clear message of support of this legislation as it comes again before the House and goes to the other body, in hopes that the other body will see fit to support the type of legislation that is coming with such bipartisan support of not only the Ways and Means Committee but through what I believe will be the entire House.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

General Leave

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to close debate on our side.

Let me first take a moment again to thank Chairman Rangel and Ranking Member McCrery for their ongoing

work on this important bill and for including two specific provisions I described earlier regarding SSI benefits for blind veterans and penalty-free withdrawals by National Guardsmen and Reservists.

Even more importantly, I want to thank my chairman and ranking member for working so hard to cultivate a true spirit of bipartisanship when we deal with issues where we can find common ground.

Today on this legislation, which is very important for both Guardsmen and Reservists and veterans who are serving our country and have served our country, and for our first responders and our firefighters, today is one where we have worked hard to take a number of bills and put them together and make it an opportunity to get results in 2007 that will be the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act. I urge a ``yes'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 884) providing for the concurrence by the House in the Senate amendments to H.R. 3997, with an amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I want to thank Mr. Rangel, Mr. Neal and Mr. McCrery, and since this was a bipartisan effort, all the hard work that went into this on both sides of the aisle. This legislation comes at a time when most of us are preparing to head home for the Christmas holidays.

Mr. Speaker, I can't tell you how our hearts all go out to those men and women who serve in our military who have sacrificed so much on our behalf. It is getting more and more difficult for many Americans to make ends meet. Why shouldn't we be doing everything we possibly can to make it easier on our military, our veterans, our first responders and their families? We should be making it easier, as this bill does, for those earning combat pay to qualify for an earned income tax credit. We should make it easier for veterans to get housing, disability assistance, and other benefits. This bill makes it easier for the spouses of fallen soldiers to draw from a loved one's retirement savings without penalty. And it makes tax breaks from State and local governments to volunteer first responders Federal income-tax free.

It wasn't lost on Chairman Rangel, Chairman Neal or the entire Ways and Means Committee, as I said previously, that with respect to the events that took place on September 11, it wasn't the military, the FBI, the CIA, the INS that responded at the World Trade Center, at the Pentagon, or in the fields of Pennsylvania. It was first responders. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is so vitally important that this legislation pass so that we provide an opportunity for those first responders who are so in need of the very rudiments that our government provides them in order to provide the great depth of service covering over 70 percent of the country in terms of the service they provide for this Nation to make sure that what little incremental benefits they get from their municipality, their county, or their State are not taxed by the IRS.

So I am proud to be part of this legislation that we move forward.

And with that I reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. McDermott, from Washington State.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy) who brought with us to the committee compelling testimony from Victoria Johnson.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Doggett), a member of the committee.

At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the preeminent authority in this Nation on mental health, and someone who has spoken with great passion and dignity on this floor as a cosponsor, along with Mr. Ramstad, of important legislation, Mr. Kennedy from Rhode Island, for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the preeminent authority on smart growth in this country, Mr. Blumenauer from Oregon, who cares deeply about veterans concerns in that State and all across the country, for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, might I inquire how much time we have left.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to refer Members to the ``Technical Explanation of the Tax Technical Correction Act of 2007,'' JCX-119-07, prepared by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, for a description of the legislative intent behind the technical corrections contained in title IV of this bill, H. Res. 884.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I recognize one of the leaders in this body and part of the Firefighter Caucus, the gentleman from New Jersey, my dear friend, Mr. Pascrell, for 2 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I recognize the gentlelady from San Diego, California, Susan Davis, for 1 minute.

At this time, Mr. Speaker, I recognize the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) for 1 minute.

Mr. Speaker, I recognize the gentlelady from New York City, Ms. Clarke, for 1\1/2\ minutes.

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 materials on H.R. 3997, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, let me rise and join the sentiment expressed by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reynolds), and I think everybody on our committee, in expressing not only the sheer joy and delight of having a ranking member and the chairman of the committee work as closely as they have throughout the year, whether we agreed or disagreed. It is quite a contrast from previous years. I think that Mr. Rangel deserves an incredible amount of credit for the manner in which he has conducted himself, as does Mr. McCrery, as evident by the concern that has been expressed by both sides as we take up this important legislation today.

Further, let me add, as has been expressed here by many, we should make sure that this bill is taken up in the Senate. They have a responsibility over in that body to make sure that they address the concerns of so many in our military, as eloquently expressed here today by so many Members on and off the committee who care deeply about issues that impact veterans and our volunteer firefighters as well.

I also want to thank the members of the Ways and Means staff, and especially Eileen Shatz, who is serving for her last week on the Ways and Means Committee; Janice Mays; John Buckley; Aruna Kalyanam, who has been here throughout the day; Kase Jubboori; Mildeen Worrell, who have all done great work on behalf of the committee; Chairman Neal, who also has been outstanding with this legislation and the hearings that he conducted in our committee; Melissa Mueller from the subcommittee staff, who was key. And also from my staff, I want to thank Amy O'Donnell. We call her the tax missionary. And also John Renfrew and Jackie Primeau, who have done such an outstanding job.

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

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding to me.

I, like the gentlemen are from Texas, am here in a state of disappointment. But mine is the reverse. A provision that was included in the Senate is not included in the House version of this bill. It is a piece of legislation that I introduced earlier this session and one that was offered as an amendment when this bill was considered by the House Ways and Means Committee, and it failed on a party-line vote. This provision, as I say, is included in the Senate bill, but it was removed when it was returned to the House, and it received unanimous approval by the Senate.

This is a commonsense clarification to the Tax Code to prevent lower income military personnel from being discriminated against when applying to live in affordable housing built under the low income housing tax credit. Our Nation's military families deserve access to safe, decent, affordable housing, and they should be given a fair opportunity to qualify for it.

This provision would clarify that members of the military will not have their military housing allowance counted against them as income when applying for affordable rental housing. The IRS does not consider military housing allowance as income, but, unfortunately, the Department of Housing and Urban Development does. The result is that some servicemembers, particularly enlisted ones, are considered to earn too much and are, thus, disqualified from living in affordable housing. Comparatively low-income civilians will qualify because they are treated differently by the IRS.

This clarification is needed now more than ever. A number of military installations across the country are experiencing housing shortages as a result the 2005 BRAC. For example, Fort Riley, an Army post located in the State of Kansas, is nearly doubling in size and will see an influx of nearly 30,000 people. Without access to adequate affordable housing opportunities, many families stationed at Fort Riley are being forced to live far away from post.

The House acted this year to exempt military housing allowance from income eligibility requirements under Head Start. Unfortunately, this discrimination persists when military families apply to live in affordable housing, and enlisted servicemembers and their families continue to be treated unfairly in communities across the country.

Mr. Speaker, while I support this legislation, I again am here to object to the exclusion of language that would level the playing field for our military enlisted men. I have introduced legislation to correct this issue; and should it not be resolved in this legislation, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1481.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Defenders of Freedom Tax Relief Act, which provides important tax relief to the heroes who are defending our country, both abroad and here at home.

I also appreciate that the bill includes a one-year extension of the 1996 mental health parity law, which prohibits insurers from discriminating against mental health treatment with aggregate lifetime or annual dollar limits.

But we must go much further to end insurance discrimination and expand access to treatment for mental illness and chemical addiction. We must knock down the barriers of higher copays and deductibles, limited treatment stays, and the lack of out-of-network benefits that do not apply to any other disease. We must pass the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act.

It's a national disgrace that 270,000 Americans were denied addiction treatment last year. It's a national tragedy that 150,000 of our fellow Americans died last year from chemical addiction and 30,000 Americans committed suicide from depression. And it's a national crisis that untreated addiction and mental illness cost our economy over $550 billion last year.

And think of the costs that can't be measured in dollars and cents-- human suffering, broken families, shattered dreams; ruined careers and destroyed lives.

Passing mental health parity is not only the right things to do; it's the cost-effective thing to do. We have all the empirical data to prove that equity for mental health and addiction treatment will save billions of dollars nationally while not raising premiums more than two-tenths of one percent.

This legislation has 273 cosponsors and passed three House committees with wide bipartisan support. It must absolutely be one of the first orders of business when Congress reconvenes in January.

It's time to end the discrimination against people who need treatment for mental illness and addiction. It's time to prohibit health insurers from placing discriminatory restrictions on treatment. It's time to provide greater access to treatment. It's time to pass the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act.

The American people cannot afford to wait any longer for Congress to act.

I thank the gentleman from Connecticut for his great work and for his very kind words. And I would like to thank Chairman Rangel and Chairman Stark for their work to pass a 1-year extension to the current mental health parity law. I would also like to thank them for their tireless work and dedication to passing H.R. 1424, the Paul Wellstone Mental Health and Addiction Equity Act.

While I am pleased that the current law is being extended in this bill which will ensure that annual and lifetime limits for mental health benefits cannot be more restrictive than physical health benefits, I must express my disappointment that a stronger mental health parity law which includes equitable treatment limits, financial limits, and out-of-network parity has not been passed yet and signed by the President this year. After three hearings, five markups in the House, and with 273 bipartisan cosponsors, this bill has been closely scrutinized by both political parties.

I hope we will return early next year and pass this bill, not as a political victory for some, but for people like Katie Kevlock, a 16- year-old girl from Pennsylvania who lost her battle to addiction. She showed up one day to her mother and said she was addicted, confessed to her mother she was addicted. Her mother took her to the hospital. The hospital said she needed insurance coverage. She went to her insurance system. Her insurer said they couldn't cover her unless she had OD'ed. They couldn't give her residential treatment unless she OD'ed. So she had to wait until she OD'ed. But what happened? As Katie's mom said, not everyone survives that first OD. And it was in the case of Katie, her first OD killed her. Katie died without the treatment that she needed to overcome her addiction. That should not happen in this country. We need to pass parity, and that is why we need to pass 1424.