(63) In section 4082 (b) of the bill strike out the second sentence and insert in lieu thereof the following: "The corporation shall not pay benefits guaranteed under this title with respect to a plan described in the preceding sentence unless the corporation finds substantial evidence that the plan was terminated for a reasonable business purpose and not for the purpose of obtaining the payment of benefits by the corporation under this title or for the purpose of avoiding the liability which might be imposed under subtitle D if the plan terminated on or after the date of enactment of this Act."

Mr. ULLMAN (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be considered as read and printed in the Record.

Mr. BAUMAN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, will the gentleman from Oregon give us some explanation of what the concurrent resolution does before we permit its consideration under unanimous consent?

Mr. ULLMAN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BAUMAN. I certainly will.

Mr. ULLMAN. This is the concurrent resolution that I spoke about earlier that deals primarily with technical corrections to the bill. This is a procedure that is used quite often on technical bills, but it also corrects the one substantive matter by removing from the conference report the language of section 1021 (g) which was a matter that dealt with the integration between the private pension program and the social security system.

Now, this concurrent resolution will deal with that matter by removing it from the conference report.

Mr. BAUMAN. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Oregon?

There was no objection.

The concurrent resolution was agreed to.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

9

[From the Congressional Record-Senate, Aug. 22, 1974]

AUTHORIZATION FOR CLERK OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES To MAKE CORRECTIONS IN THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 2

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I send to the desk a message from the House of Representatives on House Concurrent Resolution 609, and ask that it be laid before the Senate.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair lays before the Senate a message from the House, which the clerk will state.

The legislative clerk read as follows:

[The complete text of H. Con. Res. 609 appears on pp. 4722-4730.] Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate consideration of the concurrent resolution?

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the concurrent resolution.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the concurrent resolution.

The concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 609) was agreed to.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote by which the resolution was agreed to.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I move to lay that motion on the table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion to table.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. President, I am in favor of the concurrent resolution, but, for the record, would the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare tell us what it does?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair reminds the Members that a motion to table is not debatable.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I withdraw the motion.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is pending the motion to reconsider. Mr. CURTIS. Would the distinguished chairman tell us briefly what this concurrent resolution does?

Mr. WILLIAMS. First of all, it corrects a number of clerical errors that were made in the conference report on H.R. 2, the pension reform legislation.

In addition, it makes one substantive change, by removing from the conference report the language of section 1021 (g), which deals with integration between private pension programs and the Social Security System.

Mr. CURTIS. It eliminates that entirely?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes. I might explain further what this change involves.

Many of us have received telegrams expressing concern about one of the provisions in the conference report on the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974. I am referring to section 1021 (g), which appears on pages 131 and 132 of the conference report.

This provision would provide that until July 1, 1976, pension plans cannot increase their level of integration of social security with private pension plans by taking into account changes in the social security wage base or in social security benefit levels since 1971. We have been told that this will greatly increase the costs of private pension plans, something that I am sure none of the Senators would like to see occur. This is particularly true if these increased pension costs result in the termination of private pension plans. Certainly that is not the intent of this legislation which is designed to improve and encourage the expansion of private pension plans.

Personally, I am not sure that those who tell us that their funding costs will be substantially increased because of the 2-year freeze provided in this provision are correct in their analysis. If there are substantial increases in costs, I believe that this arises from the belief on the part of the private pension plan actuaries involved that once this freeze occurs there will be no further integration of social security and private pension plans thereafter. This certainly was not the intent of the 2-year freeze included in the bill.

I recognize, however, that this has caused a great deal of concern, and I personally do not want to detract from this fine piece of legislation by the creation of any confusion on this issue. For that reason I have consulted with the conferees, and they have indicated a willingness to delete this provision from the conference report. The technique for doing this is by action on a concurrent resolution today, instructing the enrolling clerk of the House to make certain technical and clerical corrections needed in the conference report before enrollment of the bill. In addition, in this same concurrent resolution would be a provision for the deletion of this provision relating to the integration of social security and private pension plans.

The conferees recognize, however, that the integration of social security and private pension plans represents a difficult problem which needs further study and attention in the future. For that reason, we recommend that the Internal Revenue Service issue no further regulations on integration of social security and pension benefits at least until June 30, 1975. This is the statement which appeared in the House Ways and Means Committee report on the pension bill and represents what I believe is a minimum action which should be taken at this time with regard to this issue of integration of social security and pension benefits. A statement outlining what I have indicated to you is available to the Senators and can be obtained from the pages.

I hope that this represents a satisfactory interim solution to the problem for the Senators. Again, I can assure you that this matter will be studied very carefully by our staffs and I understand it will be studied by the tax committees in the period ahead.

Mr. CURTIS. I have no further questions.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, if the Senator will yield, the effect of that is to use the present effective social security rates instead of old social security rates which was provided in the conference report. Mr. CURTIS. I have no objection.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion to table.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I made the motion to reconsider.
Mr. WILLIAMS. I made the motion to table.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the motion to table.
The motion was agreed to.

EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT INCOME SECURITY ACT OF 1974-CONFERENCE REPORT

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I submit a report of the committee of conference on H.R. 2. and ask for its immediate consideration. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The report will be stated by title. The second assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 2) to provide for pension reform, having met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses this report, signed by all the conferees.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the consideration of the conference report?

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the report.

[The conference report appears on pp. 3923-4300.]

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I am happy to report that after long and numerous meetings of the conferees on H.R. 2, we are able to bring before the Senate a conference agreement which has been unanimously adopted, and which, for the first time, will safeguard the pension expectations of American workers.

While the conference agreement takes the form of a substitute for the separate versions passed by the House and Senate, I am satisfied that it provides the degree of protection for pension plan participants. and their beneficiaries that the Senate endorsed when it adopted such legislation by a vote of 93 to 9 on September 19, 1973.

Indeed, the conference substitute embodies all of the essential concepts which were developed and approved in the Senate in our effort to remedy the abuses and shortcomings that have been found to exist in the private pension system.

Those concepts were the outgrowth of a 3-year, in-depth study of the private pension system begun during the 91st Congress by the Labor and Public Welfare Committee pursuant to Senate resolution. Mr. JAVITS. Will the Senator yield?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote on the conference report on private pensions occur at the hour of 1:45.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Hearing none, it is so ordered.

Mr. MANSFIELD. I thank the Senators.

Mr. WILLIAMS. This study clearly established that too many workers, rather than being able to retire in dignity and security after a lifetime of labor rendered on the promise of a future pension, find that their earned expectations are not to be realized.

Our study also demonstrated the kinds of remedial legislation needed to deal with shortcomings in the pension system, and the feasibility of such measures.

In this connection, the conference substitute, which, with certain limited exceptions reaches all private retirement plans established by employers or unions whose business or members are in, or affect, interstate commerce, deals with the following areas of concern:

First. Limiting the maximum length of time that an employee may be required to be in service before becoming a participant in a pension plan maintained by his employer for his category of employment. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, will the Senator mind yielding to me for an instant? I will explain why.

I think this bill is so vital that we ought to have a quorum and let the Members know it is on the floor for consideration.

Would the Senator mind if we had a quorum call, which would be for not more than a few minutes?

I ask unanimous consent that the Senator may resume the floor as soon as the quorum is over.

Mr. WILLIAMS. I have no objection.

Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.

The second assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further proceedings under the call be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, returning to a brief discussion of the provisions of the conference report, the second point I would like to make is that we in this report are assuring that every employee who participates in a pension plan will, within a reasonable number of years, earn a nonforfeitable or "vested" right to a pension upon reaching retirement age, whether or not he leaves the participation employment before reaching that age.

Requiring that contributions are made to pension plans at a rate sufficient to provide reasonable assurance that adequate funds will be on hand to meet all vested benefit claims.

Providing an insurance system which will protect employees and their beneficiaries in their vested pension rights, despite premature plan termination.

Imposing strict fiduciary obligations upon those who exercise management or control over the assets or administration of an employee pension or welfare plan, as well as the provision of adequate reporting and disclosure requirements.

Providing administrative and judicial remedies, available to both the government and participants, which will assure compliance with the foregoing substantive provisions.

In addition, the conference substitute provides certain amendments to existing law with respect to the tax treatment of pension plans, including tax incentives for the establishment of individual retirement accounts for those who are not otherwise covered by a pension plan. Before discussing the provisions of the conference substitute in further detail, I want to mention the contributions of those members who have been instrumental in bringing this measure to fruition.

Special tribute should be accorded Senator Javits, the ranking minority member of the Labor and Public Welfare Committee, who has been my partner throughout this entire endeavor, and whose dedi