Earned Income Credit Information Act of 2008

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Amendments Act of 2008. This bill would enhance the research programs established in the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998 and reauthorized in 2004, which have greatly enhanced our ability to predict outbreaks of harmful algal blooms and the extent of hypoxic zones. But knowing when outbreaks will occur is only half the battle. By funding additional research into mitigation and prevention of HABs and hypoxia, and by enabling communities to develop response strategies to more effectively reduce their effects on our coastal communities, this legislation would take the next critical steps to reducing the social and economic impacts of these potentially disastrous outbreaks.

I am proud to continue my leadership on this important issue and I particularly want to thank my counterpart on this key piece of legislation, Senator Bill Nelson. My partnership with Senator Breaux on the first two harmful algal bloom bills proved extremely fruitful, and I am pleased that the Gulf of Mexico--whose coastal residents are severely impacted by both harmful algal blooms, also known as HABs, and hypoxia--will continue to be so well represented as this program moves into the future. I also want to thank the bill's additional co- sponsors, Senators Cantwell, Kerry, Vitter, Voinovich, Boxer and Levin for their vital contributions. We all represent coastal States directly affected by harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, and we see first hand the ecological and economic damage caused by these events.

In New England blooms of Alexandrium algae, more commonly known as ``red tide'', can cause shellfish to accumulate toxins that when consumed by humans lead to paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP), a potentially fatal neurological disorder. Therefore, when levels of Alexandrium reach dangerous levels, our fishery managers are forced to close shellfish beds that provide hundreds of jobs and add millions of dollars to our regional economy. Red tide outbreaks--which occur in various forms not just in the northeast, but along thousands of miles of U.S. coastline--have increased dramatically in the Gulf of Maine in the last 20 years, with major blooms occurring almost every year.

In 2005, the most severe red tide since 1972 blanketed the New England coast from Martha's Vineyard to Downeast Maine, resulting in extensive commercial and recreational shellfish harvesting closures lasting several months at the peak of the seafood harvesting season. In a peer-reviewed study, economists found that the 2005 event caused over $2.4 million in lost landings of shellfish in the State of Maine alone, and more than $10 million throughout New England.

In May of this year, scientists once more predicted an abundance of Alexandrium off the New England coast, marking the onset of yet another severe harmful algal bloom in the area. Just yesterday, Maine's Department of Marine Resources announced the closure of additional shellfish beds covering many areas from Cutler east to the Canadian border, and today the Food and Drug Administration asked the National Marine Fisheries Service to issue a closure of a section of Federal waters near George's Bank to the harvest of ocean quahogs and surf clams.

Still, while this year's bloom has tracked the pattern of the 2005 event, thanks to previous investments in HAB programs, localized testing has led to fewer closures. Unlike 2005 when nearly the entire coast of Massachusetts and much of Maine was declared off-limits to shell fishermen, in this year's bloom, some unaffected areas remain open despite being directly adjacent to contaminated beds. These detailed forecasting and testing measures will greatly reduce the economic impact such outbreaks impose on our coastal communities, and is directly attributable to the efforts authorized in previous HAB legislation.

Mr. President, while we have made great strides in bloom prediction and monitoring, it is clear that these problems have not gone away, but rather increased in magnitude. Harmful algal blooms remain prevalent nationwide, and areas of hypoxia, also known as ``dead zones'', are now occurring with increasing frequency. Within a dead zone, oxygen levels plummet to the point at which they can no longer sustain life, driving out animals that can move, and killing those that cannot. The most infamous dead zone occurs annually in the Gulf of Mexico, off the shores of Louisiana. In 2007, researchers there predicted the biggest hypoxic zone ever recorded, covering more than 8,500 square miles. Dead zones are also occurring with increasing frequency in more areas than ever before, including off the coasts of Oregon and Texas.

The amendments contained in this legislation would enhance the Nation's ability to predict, monitor, and ultimately control harmful algal blooms and hypoxia. Understanding when these blooms will occur is vital, but the time has come to take this program to the next level--to determine not just when an outbreak will occur, but how to reduce its intensity or prevent its occurrence all together. This bill would build on NOAA's successes in research and forecasting by creating a program to mitigate and control HAB outbreaks.

This bill also recognizes the need to enhance coordination among State and local resource managers--those on the front lines who must make the decisions to close beaches or shellfish beds. Their decisions are critical to protecting human health, but can also impose significant economic impacts. The bill would mandate creation of Regional Research and Action Plans that would identify baseline research, possible State and local government actions to prepare for and mitigate the impacts of HABs, and establish outreach strategies to ensure the public is

informed of the dangers these events can present. A regional focus on these issues will ensure a more effective and efficient response to future events.

Mr. President, if enacted, this critical reauthorization would greatly enhance our Nation's ability to predict, monitor, mitigate, and control outbreaks of HABs and hypoxia. Over half the U.S. population resides in coastal regions, and we must do all in our power to safeguard their health and the health of the marine environment. The existing Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Program has done a laudable job to date, and this authorization will allow them to expand their scope and provide greater benefits to the Nation as a whole. I thank my cosponsors again for their efforts in developing this vital legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will address an ongoing problem that adversely affects local communities and coastal areas around my home State of Florida and across coastal States nationwide.

Today, Senator Snowe and I, along with Senators Cantwell, Kerry, Vitter, Levin, Voinovich, Boxer, Cardin, and Mikulski, are introducing a bill that would reauthorize and enhance the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act, HABHRCA, which was enacted in 1998 and reauthorized 4 years ago. This act has enabled critical monitoring, forecasting, and research activities that have greatly improved our understanding and prediction of harmful algal blooms, nuisance blooms like red drift, and low-oxygen or hypoxia events that plague our estuaries and coastal waters.

While the accomplishments made to date through HABHRCA are certainly valuable and to be commended, more work lies ahead. In Florida, harmful algal blooms, including red tides, and frequent red drift events continue to occur along our coasts.

According to experts from Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, most of Florida's red tides are caused by a microscopic algae called Karenia brevis, which creates blooms that can last for months and cover hundreds of square miles. What makes this organism so harmful are the toxins it produces. These toxins can kill fish, birds, and other marine animals. For humans, the toxins trigger respiratory problems, eye and skin irritation, and shellfish poisoning when the toxins accumulate in oysters and clams. When these blooms die, the decomposing algae strip oxygen from the water column. These hypoxic conditions deprive fish, manatees, and other animal species of the oxygen they need to survive.

A particularly devastating and intense red tide struck the Florida gulf coast in the summer of 2005, causing widespread animal deaths and public health and economic problems. The St.

Petersburg/Clearwater Area Convention and Visitors Bureau estimated upwards of $240 million in losses for the Tampa region as a result of this bloom.

Scientists have told us that red tides are a lot like hurricanes complex but natural phenomena that can have profound impacts on our environment and society. Although we may not be able to stop this natural process, we can do more to predict it and take actions to minimize its impacts on our citizens and natural resources.

While red drift algae lack the toxins associated with red tide, they can nonetheless cause enormous problems along Florida's beaches. We have had numerous red drift events in Florida over the last few years. In March 2007, some witnesses described clumps of red drift algae the size of hay bales floating on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico, and washing onshore from Fort Myers to Anna Maria Island. Scientists have also been looking into whether nutrients from the decomposing algae may feed subsequent blooms, keeping local waters in a terrible cycle.

Other algal blooms are impairing waterways and causing social and economic problems in my state. Earlier this month, a water treatment plant on the Caloosahatchee River in Lee County had to be closed temporarily due to a bloom of blue-green algae.

It is clear that harmful algal blooms and hypoxia events can have devastating impacts on water and air quality, aquatic species, wildlife, and beach conditions, which in turn affect public health, commercial and recreational fishing, tourism, and related businesses in our coastal communities. The question becomes, what can we do to stop this? If we can't stop these events, how can we better plan for them and take steps to minimize the impacts?

We have learned from scientists and researchers, many of whom were funded by HABHRCA-authorized programs, that some harmful algal blooms and red drift events can be triggered by excess nutrients from upland areas that wash into rivers and are delivered to the coast. Because this problem often crosses political and geographic boundaries, we must pursue solutions that are regional in nature and bring together expertise from all levels of government, from academia, and from other outside groups who have a stake in keeping our coastal waters healthy, clean, and productive.

Senator Snowe and I have worked together to craft a bill that will not only continue critical research on harmful algal blooms and hypoxia, but help address some of these pressing needs that exist on every coast--from the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico, to the Pacific and the Great Lakes. Our bill will help integrate and improve coordination among the government's programs that study and monitor these events. The bill would also improve how regional, state, and local needs are considered when prioritizing research grants and developing related products. Most importantly, this bill would focus new resources on translating research results into tools and products that state and local governments can use to help prevent, respond to, and mitigate the impacts of these events.

Although we have made significant progress in identifying some of the causes and consequences of harmful algal blooms and hypoxia since 1998, much work remains to find solutions that minimize the occurrence of these events and that enable our coastal communities to become resilient to the impacts. This legislation to amend and reauthorize the Harmful Algal Blooms and Hypoxia Act represents an important step toward realizing those goals.

In closing, I would like to recognize Senator Snowe for her leadership on this issue. As the sponsor of both the original legislation in 1998 and the 2004 amendments, her expertise on harmful algal blooms and the impacts of these events on her constituents has proved invaluable as we developed the measure before us today. I look forward to working with Senator Snowe, in her role as ranking member of the Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard Subcommittee of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee, as well as with Chairman Cantwell and the other members of our subcommittee, to debate this important legislation.

Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague Senator Dodd to introduce a bill that will have a tremendous impact on millions of young adults in America who will suffer from mental illness in their lifetime. The Healthy Transition Act of 2008 is an important bill and I look forward to its passage.

Senator Dodd has been an ardent champion for children, and as the Sponsor of the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act in 2004 and the bill to reauthorize the successful grant program again last year, it has been an honor to work with him to ensure our Nation's youth and their mental health needs are not forgotten.

I want to begin by thanking my colleague Representative Pete Stark for working with me on this important issue and for joining me in requesting a report by the Government Accountability Office,GAO last year on the barriers facing youth with serious mental health disorders as they age into adulthood. It has been a pleasure to work with him on drafting legislation that we will introduce today as I know he shares a passion for improving the lives of our children and young adults.

This time in a young person's life is so difficult with the pressures of being independent, finding a first job, going to college and really discovering who you are. For so many of our Nation's youth this time is made so much more difficult by their struggle with mental illness. My son Garrett struggled with his transition to adulthood and in his ability to access the help he needed during this critical time. These young adults deserve our attention, our support and our compassion.

Finally, I want to thank the many stakeholders and advocates that have put so much time and dedication into working with us to introduce this bill, the Healthy Transition Act of 2008. They include the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the Children's Defense Fund, the National Federation of Families for Children's Mental Health, the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, and the American Psychological Association, just to name a few.

The findings of the GAO report that Congressman Stark and I requested, tells us that at least 2.4 million young adults aged 18-26 had a mental illness in 2006. We know that this number could be greatly understated as it does not count young adults who are institutionalized, incarcerated or homeless--all of which are groups that are known to have higher rates of mental illness.

These young people have such tremendous challenges that cause them to demonstrate lower rates of high school graduation and college attendance than their peers who do not suffer from mental illness. They also have lower propensity to find employment and remain stable in their communities. In my home State of Oregon, this transition-age population was found to be 80 percent less likely than any other population in the State with mental health needs to receive services.

However, from this report, and the work innovative States are doing to support our young people, we know that we can do a better job of helping these youth. We can do better at ensuring they can remain stable in their communities, that they can live healthy lives, and that they can prosper as adults.

The bill that Senator Dodd, Representative Stark and I are introducing today will support States that want to do better for our Nation's young adults with mental illness. As the GAO found, too often services are not directed at this population or young adults are shoved into a system that was designed for a different age group with different needs.

Our bill, the Healthy Transition Act of 2008, will provide grants to States to first develop statewide coordination plans to assist adolescents and young adults with a serious mental health disorder to acquire the skills and resources they need to make a healthy transition to adulthood. After this plan has been submitted and evaluated by SAMHSA, States may then compete for a second round of grants to help them implement the plan that they have made.

Lastly, this bill will develop a Committee of Federal Partners that will coordinate service programs that assist adolescents and young adults with mental illness at the federal level and provide technical assistance to States as they implement their plans. They also will report to Congress on their activities so that we can ensure they are doing their best to make sure these vulnerable young adults get the help and support they need.

This is such a critical time in a person's life and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to make sure it is as healthy and positive an experience as it can be. I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure its passage. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support the bill.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today, along with my colleague from the House, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, an important and noncontroversial bill designed to increase the percentage of eligible families that claim the Earned Income Tax Credit, or EITC, every year.

The bill is endorsed by the Service Employees International Union, SEIU, Wal-Mart, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Citizens for Tax Justice, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Corporate Voices for Working Families, the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources, TJ Maxx, Kindred Healthcare, and Cintas.

Even in these tough economic times, Wal-Mart is still the nation's top private employer, and they place a huge emphasis on keeping their business costs low. If they are taking such a lead role on this bill, it should send a strong signal to the business community and to Republicans that it is a good idea and that the cost burden on business is next to nothing.

The EITC is a hugely important and popular program for working families. Started under President Ford after President Nixon advanced a similar program, and expanded under virtually every President since, the EITC sends a message that if you work hard and play by the rules, you shouldn't live in poverty.

I know the program isn't perfect, but it's the best tax tool we have for helping working families make ends meet. Combined with the recent increase in the minimum wage that Democrats pushed through the Congress, the EITC is improving the lives of million of families.

For tax year 2006, more than $44 billion in benefits were distributed to more than 22.4 million American families. That shows what a success the program is.

As one of the most populous states, with millions of working families of modest means, the numbers for New York State by itself are impressive. In 2006, nearly 1.5 million New York families took advantage of the EITC, claiming $2.8 billion in benefits. That's an average of $1,867 per family. But if the estimates from the Government Accountability Office are right and 25 percent of eligible families do not file for the credit, that's almost 500,000 families in my state who are missing out.

At an average EITC benefit of nearly $1,900, that means that more than $900 million could be going back into the pockets of New Yorkers-- without a single change in the law--if we could find a way to reach these families. It could represent a second stimulus package for 500,000 working families as large as the one we passed earlier this year--and all eligible families have to do is ask for it.

With gasoline costing over $4 a gallon, and health care and tuition costs on the rise, if we can get an average of $1,900 into the pockets of 500,000 New York families, or 7.5 million people nationally--that's an opportunity we can't pass up.

Since these families are eligible for the credit under current law, it's not a policy that has to be scored or ``paid for'' under the PAYGO rules, because current law assumes these benefits will be paid. I can't imagine anyone objecting to this bill.

The Emanuel/Schumer legislation simply requires that employers notify their workers of their potential eligibility for the EITC when they send out the annual W-2 wage notice. To satisfy the notice requirement, employers would provide either a copy of IRS Notice 797, which explains how one qualifies for the EITC, or a separate written notice that is described in the language of the bill.

For those that might be concerned about the cost to business, our bill exempts firms with less than 25 employees.

This is a bill that is such common-sense, and represents such little cost to business, and offers such a large potential benefit to so many families, that it's something that we ought to be able to pass unanimously before the end of the year.

Rep. Emanuel and I sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson today about the bill. Even though the Bush Administration is nearing its end, the goals of this legislation could be accomplished via regulation or executive order, and I urge the Administration to take such action and render the bill moot. Rep. Emanuel and I would be happy not to have to pass this bill. Otherwise, we will push it and hope to pass it with broad bipartisan support by year's end. With unions and major employers both supporting the bill, there really should be no objection.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of support be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce today, along with my colleague from the House, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, an important and noncontroversial bill designed to increase the percentage of eligible families that claim the Earned Income Tax Credit, or EITC, every year.

The bill is endorsed by the Service Employees International Union, SEIU, Wal-Mart, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the Citizens for Tax Justice, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Corporate Voices for Working Families, the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources, TJ Maxx, Kindred Healthcare, and Cintas.

Even in these tough economic times, Wal-Mart is still the nation's top private employer, and they place a huge emphasis on keeping their business costs low. If they are taking such a lead role on this bill, it should send a strong signal to the business community and to Republicans that it is a good idea and that the cost burden on business is next to nothing.

The EITC is a hugely important and popular program for working families. Started under President Ford after President Nixon advanced a similar program, and expanded under virtually every President since, the EITC sends a message that if you work hard and play by the rules, you shouldn't live in poverty.

I know the program isn't perfect, but it's the best tax tool we have for helping working families make ends meet. Combined with the recent increase in the minimum wage that Democrats pushed through the Congress, the EITC is improving the lives of million of families.

For tax year 2006, more than $44 billion in benefits were distributed to more than 22.4 million American families. That shows what a success the program is.

As one of the most populous states, with millions of working families of modest means, the numbers for New York State by itself are impressive. In 2006, nearly 1.5 million New York families took advantage of the EITC, claiming $2.8 billion in benefits. That's an average of $1,867 per family. But if the estimates from the Government Accountability Office are right and 25 percent of eligible families do not file for the credit, that's almost 500,000 families in my state who are missing out.

At an average EITC benefit of nearly $1,900, that means that more than $900 million could be going back into the pockets of New Yorkers-- without a single change in the law--if we could find a way to reach these families. It could represent a second stimulus package for 500,000 working families as large as the one we passed earlier this year--and all eligible families have to do is ask for it.

With gasoline costing over $4 a gallon, and health care and tuition costs on the rise, if we can get an average of $1,900 into the pockets of 500,000 New York families, or 7.5 million people nationally--that's an opportunity we can't pass up.

Since these families are eligible for the credit under current law, it's not a policy that has to be scored or ``paid for'' under the PAYGO rules, because current law assumes these benefits will be paid. I can't imagine anyone objecting to this bill.

The Emanuel/Schumer legislation simply requires that employers notify their workers of their potential eligibility for the EITC when they send out the annual W-2 wage notice. To satisfy the notice requirement, employers would provide either a copy of IRS Notice 797, which explains how one qualifies for the EITC, or a separate written notice that is described in the language of the bill.

For those that might be concerned about the cost to business, our bill exempts firms with less than 25 employees.

This is a bill that is such common-sense, and represents such little cost to business, and offers such a large potential benefit to so many families, that it's something that we ought to be able to pass unanimously before the end of the year.

Rep. Emanuel and I sent a letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson today about the bill. Even though the Bush Administration is nearing its end, the goals of this legislation could be accomplished via regulation or executive order, and I urge the Administration to take such action and render the bill moot. Rep. Emanuel and I would be happy not to have to pass this bill. Otherwise, we will push it and hope to pass it with broad bipartisan support by year's end. With unions and major employers both supporting the bill, there really should be no objection.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of support be printed in the Record.