reinforce full-time fire departments with volunteers, while many small towns and rural areas have only volunteers.

Throughout our history, these men have risked, and often sacrificed, their lives fighting fires in their communities with no expectation of financial reward. Their contributions and efforts do not stop while they are on duty. Volunteer firefighters play an important role at their regular places of employment, especially in industrial plants, large office buildings, hospitals, and other places where there are heavy concentrations of people.

The Committee believes that it is most appropriate that this recognition take place in coordination with a recent Presidential proclamation, "Fire Prevention Week", as a reminder of our Nation that we should give thanks to the dedicated services which volunteer firefighters perform.

NO ADDITIONAL COST WILL BE INCURRED BY ADOPTION OF THIS RESOLUTION COMPLIANCE WITH CLAUSE 2(1) (3) OF RULE XI

With respect to the requirement of clause 2(1) (3) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives

(A) The Subcommittee on Census and Population is vested under the Committee Rules with legislative and oversight jurisdiction and responsibility over the subject matter of H.J. Res. 1008 and made no specific findings and recommendations in coneection with its oversight responsibilities on this resolution;

(B) The measure does not provide new budget authority or new or increased tax expenditures within the meaning of section 3 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and thus a statement required by section 308 (a) of that Act is not necessary;

(C) No estimate or comparison of costs has been received by the Committee from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, pursuant to section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974; and

(D) The Committee has received no report from the Committee on Government Operations of oversight findings and recommendations arrived at pursuant to clause 2 (b) (a) of rule XI.

INFLATIONARY IMPACT STATEMENT

Pursuant to clause 2(1) (4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee has concluded that since no costs will be incurred under H.J. Res. 1008, no inflationary impact on prices and costs in the operation of the national economy will occur.

H.R. 1528

SPECIAL UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE EXTENSION ACT

OF 1976

SEPTEMBER 14, 1976.-Committee to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. Ullman, from the Committee on Ways and Means,
submitted the following

REPORT

together with

MINORITY VIEWS

[Including cost estimate and comparison of the Congressional Budget Office]

[To accompany H.R. 14970]

The Committee on Ways and Means, to whom was referred the bill (H.R. 14970) to extend the special unemployment assistance program for one year, and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

H.R. 14970

A Bill to Modify and Extend for One Year the Special Unemployment Assistance Program

I. Summary of Bill

CONTENTS

II. Section-by-Section Explanation and Justification

III. Comparison With Present Law

IV. Cost Estimate, New Budget Authority and Outlays, and Report Prepared by the Congressional Budget Office

V. Other Matters Required to be Discussed Under House Rules

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

VII. Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
VIII. Minority Views of Ion. William M. Ketchum

I. SUMMARY OF BILL

The purpose of H.R. 14970 is to continue for one additional year temporary unemployment compensation protection under a modified Special Unemployment Assistance (SUA) program for those groups of workers who will be brought into the permanent Federal/State program under the provisions of H.R. 10210, the Unemployment Compensation Amendments of 1976. The bill would maintain unemployment compensation (U.C.) protection for agricultural workers, domestic workers, and State and local government employees between December 31, 1976, when SUA expires under existing law, and January 1, 1978, the effective date for coverage of these groups of workers under the permanent Federal/State U.C. program proposed in H.R. 10210.

H.R. 14970 would make changes in the SUA program to restrict the payment of benefits to eligible unemployed individuals working in employment not covered under permanent Federal or State U.C. law (agricultural, domestic, and State and local government employment). It would also prohibit payment of benefits during recess periods to nonprofessional school employees with reasonable assurance of returning to their previous jobs at the end of the recess period. A similar provision pertaining to professional school employees (teachers, researchers and administrators) is contained in present law.

II. SECTION-BY-SECTION EXPLANATION AND JUSTIFICATION Section 1 provides that the short title of the bill will be the "Special Unemployment Assistance Extension Act of 1976."

Section 2 extends for one year, to December 31, 1977 with phaseout through March 31, 1978, a program of Special Unemployment Assistance for unemployed individuals whose work experience is in employment that is not covered under permanent Federal or State U.C. law. In December 1974, when unemployment was increasing rapidly, Congress established for one year the Special Unemployment Assistance (SUA) program (Public Law 93-567). The purpose of the program was to provide U.C. benefits financed out of Federal general revenues for unemployed workers not eligible for U.C. benefits under any other State or Federal law. As originally enacted, SUA provided a maximum of 26 weeks of benefits to eligible unemployed workers when the rate of total unemployment was 6 percent or higher nationally, or 6.5 percent or higher in local areas as defined under the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-203). To receive SUA an individual had to be ineligible for benefits under any other State or Federal U.C. law and meet the State's qualifying employment and wage requirements within the 52-week period preceding his first claim for assistance.

In June 1975, Congress extended the SUA program for one year, through December 31, 1976 (with phaseout through March 31, 1977), and increased from 26 to 39 the maximum number of weeks an individual could receive SUA benefits (Public Law 94-45). Also, provisions were included prohibiting the payment of SUA benefits during school recess periods to professional school employees (teachers, administrators, and researchers) who had contracts covering the school terms or years before and after the recess period.

H.R. 1536

Immediately following the enactment of that extension of SUA, the Unemployment Compensation Subcommittee of the Committee on Ways and Means began hearings on legislation that would extend coverage under the permanent Federal/State program to substantially all wage and salary earners, and thereby eliminate the need for the SUA program. On October 20, 1975, the Subcommittee approved H.R. 10210 which extended coverage under the permanent U.C. law to all State and local government employees, agricultural workers employed by larger farm operations, and domestic employees of employers who pay $600 or more in quarterly wages for domestic services. The Department of Labor estimated that these coverage provisions would extend permanent U.C. protection to 8.9 million of the 10 million jobs not presently covered under permanent law: 7.7 million local government jobs, 0.6 million State government jobs, 0.3 million farm jobs, and 0.3 million domestic jobs. Under the Subcommittee bill, these coverage provisions would have become effective January 1, 1977, or just as SUA expired on December 31, 1976, and would have therefore prevented a gap in U.C. protection for the workers covered under H.R. 10210.

H.R. 10210 was approved without change by the Ways and Means Committee on December 11, 1975. Delays created by tax legislation and other emergency bills prevented the Rules Committee from scheduling House action on H.R. 10210 before the end of the session. in 1975. It was hoped that the House and Senate would be able to act on H.R. 10210 early in 1976 so that the coverage provisions could take effect on January 1, 1977, or at the time coverage under SUA expired. Under the new budget procedures, however, legislation like H.R. 10210 was subject to a point of order on the House floor until after the House had approved the first concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 1977. The budget resolution was approved in May and the House approved H.R. 10210 on July 20, 1976. Because of the delay in House consideration of the bill, it was necessary to move the effective dates in H.R. 10210 forward one year through a committee amendment approved prior to House passage of the bill.

As approved by the House, H.R. 10210 extends coverage under the permanent Federal/State U.C. law to agricultural workers of employers with 4 or more workers in 20 weeks or who paid $10,000 in quarterly wages for agricultural services; to domestic workers of employers who paid $600 or more in any calendar quarter for domestic services; and to State and local government employees. This coverage becomes effective January 1, 1978, leaving a one year gap between the expiration of SUA under current law (December 31, 1976) and the coverage provided under H.R. 10210 (January 1, 1978). The committee's decision to modify and extend the SUA program as proposed in H.R. 14970 was predicated on the desire to prevent this gap in U.C. protection for the groups of workers who will be included in the permanent U.C. program under the provisions of H.R. 10210, and to provide for an orderly transition from coverage of these workers under SUA to the permanent Federal/State program.

It is the Committee's expectation that H.R. 10210 will be enacted. before the expiration of the Special Unemployment Assistance program as extended by this Bill and, therefore, further SUA extensions will be unnecessary. However, should that not be the case, it is the

H.R. 1536

Committee's view that SUA ought not be extended beyond January 1, 1978 in any event. The program, while on balance, clearly beneficial, has caused significant distortions in our national permanent program and should be discontinued with the expiration of this proposed

extension.

Section 3 eliminates the special "base period" and "benefit year" for determination of SUA eligibility and benefit payments contained in existing law. Under the provisions of this section, after December 30, 1976 SUA eligibility and benefit payments must be determined on the basis of the base period and benefit year in the State U.C. law in which the claims are made.

The base period is the specified time period prior to an individual's filing for U.C. benefits during which the claimant must have sufficient employment, in terms of weeks of work or wages earned, in order to qualify for benefits. The amount and duration of benefits paid to an eligible claimant are also determined on the basis of employment experience during the base period. In 35 States, the base period is the first 4 of the last 5 quarters prior to the application for U.C. benefits. In other words, two-thirds of the States measure employment experience during a base period that excludes work done in the three to six months just prior to the time a claim is first filed. As a result, the claimant's most recent employment-work done in the three to six months just prior to filing for U.C. benefits-is not included in the determination of eligibility or benefit amount. The reason for this type of a base period is that it allows the States in making determinations of eligibility and benefit payments to use the records of quarterly and annual earnings that are supplied by employers when they submit their UI taxpayments and related reports.

Under existing law, the base period for SUA claims, in all States, must be the 52-week period immediately preceding the date the initial claim is made. In other words, under present law SUA eligibility and benefit payments must be determined on the basis of the claimant's work experience in the 52 weeks before he or she files for benefits, regardless of the base period in the State U.C. law. This special base period for SUA claimants has created administrative problems in those States with a base period that excludes the most recent three to six months of employment. Also the special base period has made it possible for a substantial number of individuals in these States to qualify for SUA benefits rather than regular State U.C. benefits, even though they had been working in covered employment (e.g., mining, construction, retailing, manufacturing, etc.). They qualified for SUA because their work experience was during the most recent three to six months before filing for U.C. These individuals had sufficient employment, in terms of wages earned, to qualify for regular State U.C. benefits, and they had been working in covered employment. However, they had earned these wages during the three to six months just before they applied for U.C., or during the period that is excluded by the State base period in determining eligibility for regular State U.C. benefits. As a result, they could not qualify for regular U.C. benefits. However, because of the most recent 5--week base period under SUA, they did qualify for and receive SUA benefits.

The benefit year is the period during which a qualified claimant may receive the U.C. benefits to which he or she is entitled. Under