Posted on 06/09/2007 5:40:59 PM PDT by Remember_Salamis
Family Education Freedom Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)
HR 1056 IH
110th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 1056
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals a credit against income tax for tuition and related expenses for public and nonpublic elementary and secondary education.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 14, 2007
Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. FEENEY, Mr. RUSH, and Mr. SENSENBRENNER) 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 individuals a credit against income tax for tuition and related expenses for public and nonpublic elementary and secondary education.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Family Education Freedom Act of 2007'.
SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR TUITION AND RELATED EXPENSES FOR PUBLIC AND NONPUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION.
(a) In General- Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after section 25D the following new section:
`SEC. 25E. TUITION AND RELATED EXPENSES FOR PUBLIC AND NONPUBLIC ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION.
`(a) Allowance of Credit- In the case of an individual, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the qualified educational expenses paid during such taxable year for the elementary or secondary education of any dependent (as defined in section 152) of the taxpayer at a qualified educational institution.
`(b) Limitation- The credit allowed by this section shall not exceed $5,000 per student for any taxable year.
`(c) Definitions- For purposes of this section--
`(1) QUALIFIED EDUCATIONAL EXPENSES- The term `qualified educational expenses' means cost of attendance in connection with the elementary or secondary education of the student at a qualified educational institution. Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the rules relating to cost of attendance (within the meaning of section 472 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ll) (as in effect on the date of the enactment of this paragraph) shall apply for purposes of the preceding sentence.
`(2) QUALIFIED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION- The term `qualified educational institution' means any educational institution (including any private, parochial, religious, or home school) organized for the purpose of providing elementary or secondary education, or both.
`(d) Cost-of-Living Adjustment-
`(1) IN GENERAL- In the case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 2007, the $5,000 amount contained in subsection (b) shall be increased by an amount equal to--
`(A) $5,000, multiplied by
`(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable year begins by substituting `calendar year 2006' for `calendar year 1992' in subparagraph (B) thereof.
`(2) ROUNDING- If any increase determined under paragraph (1) is not a multiple of $10, such increase shall be rounded to the next highest multiple of $10. In the case of a married individual (as determined under section 7703) filing a separate return, the preceding sentence shall be applied by substituting `$5' for `$10' each place it appears.
`(e) Regulations- The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to carry out this section, including regulations providing for claiming the credit under this section on Form 1040EZ.'.
(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 25D the following new item:
`Sec. 25E. Tuition and related expenses for public and nonpublic elementary and secondary education.'.
(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply to amounts paid in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2006.
On the Contrary, he has called for the largest tax cut in American History -- a bill to give up to a $5,000 tax credit for every child pulled out of public school.
L Ron Paul postings are a waste of electrons.
A cut & run Republican is worse than a liberal.
don’t care about the tax cuts huh?
I imagine you’d support a socialist like Lieberman as long as they remained in Iraq...
You have no principles.
You prefer left-wing Wilsonian foreign policy adventures over a true conservative.
Shouldn’t you ping those you have included in a post?
If Ron Paul cares so much about children, then why doesn’t he take a strong pro-life stance like a ‘true conservative’ should?
SEE:
Please enjoy our forum, but also please remember to use common courtesy when posting and refrain from posting personal attacks, profanity, vulgarity, threats, racial or religious bigotry, or any other materials offensive or otherwise inappropriate for a conservative family audience.
Naughty-Naughty-Naughty!
LOL, Ron Paul? More government spending? Wow, getting desparate trying to defame the good doctor aren't they? Dr. Paul is one of the few limited government conservatives left in the party and his campaign is the only reason I am maintaining my voter registration as Republican.
I do wonder however after September what good 'conservatives' will do when some of the others left in the race begin to waver on keeping troops in Iraq indefinitely...
Lol. Ron Paul is bad on foreign policy, Lieberman is bad on internal polic. We aren’t even in a situation to chose between Lieberman and Paul. I just love (well actually not) the Paulistas’ scare scenarios.
We have plenty of good choices.
I don’t need to make compromises between tax cuts and a pro-victory foreign policy.
Please, let’s have a civil debate - we can disagree without being disagreeable. I don’t want anyone banned because he or she supports RP,JM, or RG, but let’s be civil. I am not dimwitted, I have a degree in Electrical Engineering. I commend RP for this legislation.
Ron Paul said what he said in the debate. He wants to amend it or make it clear, by all means do so.
I saw it, it doesn’t bother me.
I pointed out what Ron Paul said in the debate. If he misspoke, he should modify his comments.
109th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. R. 776
To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 10, 2005
Mr. PAUL (for himself, Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey, and Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
A BILL
To provide that human life shall be deemed to exist from conception.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Sanctity of Life Act of 2005’.
SEC. 2. FINDING AND DECLARATION.
(a) Finding- The Congress finds that present day scientific evidence indicates a significant likelihood that actual human life exists from conception.
(b) Declaration- Upon the basis of this finding, and in the exercise of the powers of the Congress—
(1) the Congress declares that—
(A) human life shall be deemed to exist from conception, without regard to race, sex, age, health, defect, or condition of dependency; and
(B) the term `person’ shall include all human life as defined in subparagraph (A); and
(2) the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State.
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON APPELLATE JURISDICTION.
(a) In General- Chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
`Sec. 1260. Appellate jurisdiction; limitation
`Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 1253, 1254, and 1257, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any case arising out of any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, or any part thereof, or arising out of any act interpreting, applying, enforcing, or effecting any statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, or practice, on the grounds that such statute, ordinance, rule, regulation, practice, act, or part thereof—
`(1) protects the rights of human persons between conception and birth; or
`(2) prohibits, limits, or regulates—
`(A) the performance of abortions; or
`(B) the provision of public expense of funds, facilities, personnel, or other assistance for the performance of abortions.’.
(b) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 81 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
`1260. Appellate jurisdiction; limitation.’.
SEC. 4. LIMITATION ON DISTRICT COURT JURISDICTION.
(a) In General- Chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
`Sec. 1370. Limitation on jurisdiction
`Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the district courts shall not have jurisdiction of any case or question which the Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction to review under section 1260 of this title.’.
(b) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 85 of title 28, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
`1370. Limitation on jurisdiction.’.
SEC. 5. EFFECTIVE DATE.
The provisions of this Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply to any case pending on such date of enactment.
SEC. 6. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this Act or the amendments made by this Act, or the application of this Act or such amendments to any person or circumstance is determined by a court to be invalid, the validity of the remainder of this Act and the amendments made by this Act and the application of such provision to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected by such determination.
“If Ron Paul cares so much about children, then why doesn’t he take a strong pro-life stance like a ‘true conservative’ should?”
He does:
http://www.commentaryusa.com/commentary/politics/pro-life-leader-endorses-ron-paul.html
“L Ron Paul postings are a waste of electrons.”
Doesn’t matter, electrons like him.
I’d like to understand Ron Paul’s votes against the bulk of legislation to protect children from pedophiles, pornographers, and other criminals. When I search the Washington Post archive for legislation, Ron Paul is often the only vote against such legislation. Why is that?
Because in many of the instances, the Constitution does not provide the power for the federal government to become involved. Dr. Paul has stated before there are bills he would like to vote for but he understands the Constitution does not give the federal government that power.
“A cut & run Republican is worse than a liberal”
Iraqi leaders aren’t stupid, why should they pay for policing their country if we’ll do it for them at no cost?
LOL! Spare me. I have plenty of conservative values...Reagan ones. What part of Strong National Defense/National Security don’t you understand.
I will never vote for that POS, so don’t waste your breath.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.