Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 9, 2003
Small Business Growth and Worker Assistance Act - Amends the Internal Revenue Code to permit an individual taxpayer to exclude from gross income 75 (currently, 50) percent of any gain from the sale or exchange of qualified small business stock held for more than three (currently, five) years. Increases from 50 to 60 percent the applicable percentage in the case of an empowerment zone business.Provides for a 15 year recovery period for restaurant buildings.Increases the section 179 expensing limit to $50,000.Amends the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002 to extend the temporary extended unemployment compensation program to July 1, 2003.Amends the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 to authorize FY 2003 appropriations of: (1) $1 billion (currently, such sums as necessary) for youth activities; (2) $2 billion (currently, such sums as necessary) for adult employment and training activities; and (3) $2 billion (currently, such sums as necessary) for dislocated worker employment and training activities.Declares that, if the Federal medical assistance percentage (FMAP) under title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act (SSA) for a State for FY 2003 is less than the FMAP for FY 2002, the FY 2002 FMAP shall be substituted for the State's FMAP for the third and fourth calendar quarters of FY 2003. Declares similarly that, if a State's FY 2004 FMAP is less than the FY 2003 FMAP, the FY 2003 FMAP shall be substituted for each calendar quarter of FY 2004.Requires each eligible State for each calendar quarter for the last two calendar quarters of FY 2003 through FY 2004 to be increased by 1.35 percentage points. Prohibits application of the FMAP increases for a State under this Act with respect to: (1) disproportionate share hospital payments under Medicaid; and (2) payments under SSA titles IV and XXI (State Children's Health Insurance).Amends SSA title XX (Block Grants to States for Social Services) to appropriate $3 billion for State fiscal relief allotments to be available for obligation through June 30, 2004, and for expenditure through September 30, 2004.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.106 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.106 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.106 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.106 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.