[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 47 (Wednesday, March 24, 1999)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3262-S3276]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




     ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE NATIONAL MUSEUM OF WOMEN'S HISTORY

 Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, in honor of Women's History Month, 
today I am introducing legislation to create an Advisory Committee for 
the National Museum of Women's History. I am pleased to be joined by 17 
of my colleagues: Senators Hutchison, Murray, Mikulski, Boxer, Collins, 
Rockefeller, Reid, Biden, Akaka, Kerry (MA), Ashcroft, Dodd, Durbin, 
Torricelli, Inouye, Leiberman, and Sarbanes.
  For far too long, women have contributed to history, but have largely 
been forgotten in our history books, in our monuments, and in our 
museums. It is long past time that the roles women have played be 
removed from the shadows of indifference and given a place where they 
can shine.
  The bill we are introducing today will create a 26 member Advisory 
Committee to look at the following three issues and report back to 
Congress concerning (1) identification of a site for the museum in the 
District of Columbia; (2) development of a business plan to allow the 
creation and maintenance of the museum to be done solely with private 
contributions and 3) assistance with the collection and program of the 
museum.
  It is important to note that this bill does not commit Congress to 
spending any money for this museum. The Committee's report will tell us 
the feasibility of funding the museum privately. And I believe that the 
Museum's Board has shown that they have the ability to do just that.
  The concept for the National Museum of Women's History (NMWH) was 
created back in 1996. Since that time, the Board of Directors, lead by 
President Karen Staser, has worked tirelessly to build support and 
interest for this project. And judging by the fact that they have 
raised more than $10.5 million for the project, lent their support to 
the moving of the Suffragette statute from the crypt to the Rotunda, 
and raised $85,000 for that effort, I'd say they are well on their way 
to success.
  They have also spent a lot of time answering the question ``why do we 
need a women's museum when we have the Smithsonian.'' The first answer 
to that comes from Edith Mayo, Curator Emeritus of the Smithsonian 
National Museum of American History, who notes that since 1963 only two 
exhibits--two--were dedicated to the role of women in history.
  The fact is, in the story of America's success, the chapter on 
women's contributions has largely been left on the editing room floor. 
Here's what I mean: Many of us know that women fought and got the vote 
in 1920, with the ratification of the 19th Amendment to the 
Constitution. But how many know that Wyoming gave women the right to 
vote in 1869, 51 years earlier, and that by 1900 Utah, Colorado and 
Idaho had granted women the right to vote? Or that the suffragette 
movement took 72 years to meet its goal? And few know that the women of 
Utah sewed dresses made from silk for the Suffragettes on their cross 
country tour.

  History is filled with other little known but significant milestones: 
like the first woman elected to the United States Senate was Hattie 
Wyatt Caraway from Louisiana in 1932. That Margaret Chase Smith, from 
my home state of Maine, was the first woman elected to the US Senate in 
her own right in 1948, and in 1962 became the first women to run for 
the US Presidency in the primaries of a major political party. Or that 
the first female cabinet member was Frances Perkins, Secretary of Labor 
for FDR.
  How many people know that Margaret Reha Seddon was the first US woman 
to achieve the full rank of astronaut, and flew her first space mission 
aboard the Space Shuttle ``Discovery'' in 1985, twenty three years 
after the distinguished former Senator from the State of Ohio, John 
Glenn completed his historic first flight in space?
  And I can guarantee you more people know the last person to hit over 
.400 in baseball--Ted Williams--than can name the first woman elected 
to Congress--Jeannette Rankin of Montana, who was elected in 1916, four 
years before ratification of the 19th Amendment gave women the right to 
vote.
  Hardly household names. But they should be. And with a place to 
showcase their accomplishments, perhaps one day they will take their 
rightful place beside America's greatest minds, visionary leaders, and 
groundbreaking figures. But until then, we have a long way to go.
  Whatever period of history you chose--women played a role. Sybil 
Ludington, a 16-year-old, rode through parts of New York and 
Connecticut in April of 1777 to warn that the Redcoats were coming. 
Sacajawea, the Shoshone Indian guide, helped escort Lewis and Clark on 
their 8000 mile expedition. Rosa Parks, Jo Ann Robinson and Myrlie 
Evers played important roles in the civil rights movement in the 50's 
and 60's. And as we move into the 21st century, the role of women--who 
now make up 52 percent of the population--will continue to be integral 
to the future success of this country.
  In fact the real question about the building of a women's museum is 
not so much where it will be built--although that remains to be 
explored. And it's not even who will pay for it--as I've said, it will 
be done entirely with private funds. The real question when it comes to 
a museum dedicated to women's history is, where will they put it all!
  I would argue that we have a solemn responsibility to teach our 
children, and ourselves, about our rich past--and that includes the 
myriad contributions of women, in all fields and every endeavor. These 
women can serve as role models and inspire our youth. They can teach us 
about our past and guide us into our future. They can even prompt young 
women to consider a career in public service--as Senator Smith of Maine 
did for me.
  Instead, today in America, more young women probably know the names 
of the latest super models then the names of the female members of this 
Administration's Cabinet. That is why we need a National Museum of 
Women's History, that is why I am proud to sponsor this legislation, 
and that is why I hope that my colleagues will join us in supporting 
the creation of this Advisory Committee as a first step toward writing 
the forgotten chapters of the history of our nation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Chafee, Ms. 
        Landrieu, Mr. Levin, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Kerrey):
  S. 708. A bill to improve the administrative efficiency and 
effectiveness of the Nation's abuse and neglect courts and the quality 
and availability of training for judges, attorneys, and volunteers 
working in such courts, and for other purposes consistent with the 
Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


         THE STRENGTHENING ABUSE AND NEGLECT COURTS ACT OF 1999

  Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 1999, a bill to improve 
the administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the juvenile and 
family courts, as well as the quality and availability of training for 
judges, attorneys and guardian ad litems. I am joined in this 
introduction by Senator Rockefeller, and I thank him for all of his 
hard work on behalf of abused and neglected children and I look forward 
to working with him as we move forward with this legislation.
  I have been involved with children's issues for over two decades, not 
just as the father of eight, but also as a local county elected 
official. I know the kinds of problems that exist at the ground level, 
and I think it's very important that we work together to address them.
  This is especially true today, as opposed to a couple of years ago, 
because the child welfare agencies and the

[[Page S3263]]

courts have an important new task--the implementation of the Adoption 
and Safe Families Act.
  Almost one and a half years ago, Congress passed this historic piece 
of legislation, which was designed to encourage safe and permanent 
family placements for abused and neglected children--and to decrease 
the amount of time that a child spends in the foster care system. With 
this law, we make it clear that the health and safety of the child must 
come first when making any decision for a child in the abuse and 
neglect system. This law shortens the time line for children in foster 
care. Specifically, the law requires initiation of proceedings to 
terminate parental rights for any child who has been in the foster care 
system for 15 of the last 22 months.
  These timelines are very important. Foster care was meant to be a 
temporary solution--but for too many children foster care has become a 
way of life. However, the institution of these timelines has created 
additional pressure on an already overburdened court system.
  To give you an idea of the burden that already exists, consider this: 
When the Family Court was established in New York in 1962, it reviewed 
96,000 cases the first year. By 1997, the case load had increased to 
670,000 cases.
  A September 1997 report by the Fund for Modern Courts found that 
Family Court judges were overburdened and forced to provide, quote, 
``assembly line justice''--because they only had a few minutes to 
review each case. The report found that in Brooklyn, cases receive an 
average of 4 minutes before a judge on a first appearance and little 
more than 11 minutes on subsequent appearances. The report concluded 
that, quote: ``It is easy to understand how a tragedy can result from 
decisions made based on so little actual time in court.'' End of quote.
  And that's not the only problem in the system. In Cuyahoga County, 
Ohio, the juvenile court identified 3,000 cases that were open, but 
inactive. In most of these cases, the child had been charged with a 
minor crime, but never had his or her case scheduled for trial. But 
more than 100 of these cases involved children who remained in foster 
care for months or even years, despite the fact that a judge had 
ordered them to be returned home to their parents.
  Another problem faced in Cuyahoga County, and in many other places, 
is the missing file. Until recently, the court had no central clerk's 
file, so there was no way of tracking the location of a particular 
file. If the file could not be found on the day of a hearing or review, 
it would result in a postponement, adding months to a child's stay in 
foster care. It is undisputed that children need permanency as quickly 
as possible. It is simply unconscionable that children should be 
trapped in foster care by a Dickensian nightmare of paperwork.
  And you also have to wonder where the lawyers, case workers and 
guardians for these children were--and what they were doing as these 
cases dragged on for months or even years longer than necessary. It is 
a symptom of the overburdened child welfare system and the lack of 
resources available for everyone involved --the child welfare agencies, 
the attorneys, the guardians, the courts. It's not their fault, but 
it's not tolerable either.
  We, collectively--as public servants, and as a society--must do 
better.
  Some abuse and neglect courts have already found innovative ways to 
eliminate their backlog of cases and move children toward permanency. 
One example is in Hamilton County, Ohio, where the Juvenile Court, 
under the leadership of Judge David Grossmann, has instituted a system 
that successfully has reduced the amount of time a child spends in 
care. Hamilton County added hearing officers so that more time could be 
spent on each case--leading to better quality decision making and 
reduced case loads. The court also developed a computer tracking system 
so that the judge could have essential information on each case at his 
or her fingertips, and the ``missing file'' would no longer be a bar to 
permanency.
  The state of Connecticut has also created an innovative way of 
dealing with the backlog of cases in its child welfare system. The 
Child Protection Session is a court dedicated to settling the most 
difficult abuse and neglect cases--contested cases of abuse and neglect 
and termination of parental rights proceedings. Connecticut has 
recognized that these types of cases need to be handled expeditiously, 
and as a result of the special session, these cases are now being 
handled in months, rather than years, to the benefit of all of the 
children involved.
  The General Accounting Office (GAO) recently reported to Congress the 
results of its review of juvenile and family courts performance in 
achieving permanence for children. GAO identified three elements that 
are essential to successful court reform.
  (1) Judicial leadership and collaboration among the child welfare 
participants.
  (2) Timely information regarding the court's operations and 
processing of cases; and
  (3) Sufficient financial resources to initiate and sustain reform.
  The Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 1999 incorporates 
all of these elements. The bill provides competitive grants to courts 
to create computerized case tracking systems and to encourage the 
replication and implementation of successful systems in other courts. 
The bill also provides grants to courts to reduce pending backlogs of 
abuse and neglect cases so that courts are able to comply with the time 
lines established in the Adoption and Safe Families Act.
  The bill also includes a provision to allow judges, attorneys and 
court personnel to qualify for training under Title IV-E's existing 
training provisions. Finally, the bill includes a provision that would 
expand the CASA program to underserved and urban areas so that more 
children are able to benefit from its services.
  When Congress passed the Adoption and Safe Families Act, I said that 
the bill is a good start, but that Congress will have to do more to 
make sure that every child has the opportunity to live in a safe, 
stable, loving and permanent home. One of the essential ingredients in 
this process is an efficiently operating court system. After all, 
that's where a lot of delays occur. As well-intentioned as the strict 
time lines of the Adoption and Safe Families Act are, mandatory filing 
dates won't be enough to promote permanency if the court docket is too 
clogged to move the cases through the system. We need to provide 
assistance to the courts so that administrative efficiency and 
effectiveness are improved and the goals of the Adoption and Safe 
Families Act will be more readily achieved. I encourage my colleagues 
to support this legislation and I am committed to pushing for its 
timely consideration.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 708

       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 ``Strengthening Abuse and 
     Neglect Courts Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Under both Federal and State law, the courts play a 
     crucial and essential role in the Nation's child welfare 
     system and in ensuring safety, stability, and permanence for 
     abused and neglected children under the supervision of that 
     system.
       (2) The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 
     105-89; 111 Stat. 2115) establishes explicitly for the first 
     time in Federal law that a child's health and safety must be 
     the paramount consideration when any decision is made 
     regarding a child in the Nation's child welfare system.
       (3) The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 promotes 
     stability and permanence for abused and neglected children by 
     requiring timely decision-making in proceedings to determine 
     whether children can safely return to their families or 
     whether they should be moved into safe and stable adoptive 
     homes or other permanent family arrangements outside the 
     foster care system.
       (4) To avoid unnecessary and lengthy stays in the foster 
     care system, the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 
     specifically requires, among other things, that States move 
     to terminate the parental rights of the parents of those 
     children who have been in foster care for 15 of the last 22 
     months.
       (5) While essential to protect children and to carry out 
     the general purposes of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 
     1997, the accelerated timelines for the termination of 
     parental rights and the other requirements imposed under that 
     Act increase the pressure on the Nation's already 
     overburdened abuse and neglect courts.

[[Page S3264]]

       (6) The administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the 
     Nation's abuse and neglect courts would be substantially 
     improved by the acquisition and implementation of 
     computerized case-tracking systems to identify and eliminate 
     existing backlogs, to move abuse and neglect caseloads 
     forward in a timely manner, and to move children into safe 
     and stable families. Such systems could also be used to 
     evaluate the effectiveness of such courts in meeting the 
     purposes of the amendments made by, and provisions of, the 
     Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997.
       (7) The administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the 
     Nation's abuse and neglect courts would also be improved by 
     the identification and implementation of projects designed to 
     eliminate the backlog of abuse and neglect cases, including 
     the temporary hiring of additional judges, extension of court 
     hours, and other projects designed to reduce existing 
     caseloads.
       (8) The administrative efficiency and effectiveness of the 
     Nation's abuse and neglect courts would be further 
     strengthened by improving the quality and availability of 
     training for judges, court personnel, agency attorneys, 
     guardians ad litem, volunteers who participate in court-
     appointed special advocate (CASA) programs, and attorneys who 
     represent the children and the parents of children in abuse 
     and neglect proceedings.
       (9) While recognizing that abuse and neglect courts in this 
     country are already committed to the quality administration 
     of justice, the performance of such courts would be even 
     further enhanced by the development of models and educational 
     opportunities that reinforce court projects that have already 
     been developed, including models for case-flow procedures, 
     case management, representation of children, automated 
     interagency interfaces, and ``best practices'' standards.
       (10) Judges, magistrates, commissioners, and other judicial 
     officers play a central and vital role in ensuring that 
     proceedings in our Nation's abuse and neglect courts are run 
     efficiently and effectively. The performance of those 
     individuals in such courts can only be further enhanced by 
     training, seminars, and an ongoing opportunity to exchange 
     ideas with their peers.
       (11) Volunteers who participate in court-appointed special 
     advocate (CASA) programs play a vital role as the eyes and 
     ears of abuse and neglect courts in proceedings conducted by, 
     or under the supervision of, such courts and also bring 
     increased public scrutiny of the abuse and neglect court 
     system. The Nation's abuse and neglect courts would benefit 
     from an expansion of this program to currently underserved 
     communities.
       (12) Improved computerized case-tracking systems, 
     comprehensive training, and development of, and education on, 
     model abuse and neglect court systems, particularly with 
     respect to underserved areas, would significantly further the 
     purposes of the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 by 
     reducing the average length of an abused and neglected 
     child's stay in foster care, improving the quality of 
     decision-making and court services provided to children and 
     families, and increasing the number of adoptions.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (a) Abuse and Neglect Courts.--The term ``abuse and neglect 
     courts'' means the State and local courts that carry out 
     State or local laws requiring proceedings (conducted by or 
     under the supervision of the courts)--
       (1) that implement part B and part E of title IV of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et seq.) 
     (including preliminary disposition of such proceedings);
       (2) that determine whether a child was abused or neglected;
       (3) that determine the advisability or appropriateness of 
     placement in a family foster home, group home, or a special 
     residential care facility; or
       (4) that determine any other legal disposition of a child 
     in the abuse and neglect court system.
       (b) Agency Attorney.--The term ``agency attorney'' means an 
     attorney or other individual, including any government 
     attorney, district attorney, attorney general, State 
     attorney, county attorney, city solicitor or attorney, 
     corporation counsel, or privately retained special 
     prosecutor, who represents the State or local agency 
     administrating the programs under parts B and E of title IV 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et 
     seq.) in a proceeding conducted by, or under the supervision 
     of, an abuse and neglect court, including a proceeding for 
     termination of parental rights.
       (c) Attorney Representing a Child.--The term ``attorney 
     representing a child'' means an attorney or a guardian ad 
     litem who represents a child in a proceeding conducted by, or 
     under the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court.
       (d) Attorney Representing a Parent.--The term ``attorney 
     representing a parent'' means an attorney who represents a 
     parent who is an official party to a proceeding conducted by, 
     or under the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court.

     SEC. 4. GRANTS TO STATE COURTS AND LOCAL COURTS TO AUTOMATE 
                   THE DATA COLLECTION AND TRACKING OF PROCEEDINGS 
                   IN ABUSE AND NEGLECT COURTS.

       (a) Authority To Award Grants.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Attorney 
     General, acting through the Office of Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention of the Office of Justice Programs, 
     shall award grants in accordance with this section to State 
     courts and local courts for the purposes of--
       (A) enabling such courts to develop and implement automated 
     data collection and case-tracking systems for proceedings 
     conducted by, or under the supervision of, an abuse and 
     neglect court;
       (B) encouraging the replication of such systems in abuse 
     and neglect courts in other jurisdictions; and
       (C) requiring the use of such systems to evaluate a court's 
     performance in implementing the requirements of parts B and E 
     of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et 
     seq.; 670 et seq.).
       (2) Limitations.--
       (A) Number of grants.--Not less than 20 nor more than 50 
     grants may be awarded under this section.
       (B) Per state limitation.--Not more than 2 grants 
     authorized under this section may be awarded per State.
       (C) Use of grants.--Funds provided under a grant made under 
     this section may only be used for the purpose of developing, 
     implementing, or enhancing automated data collection and 
     case-tracking systems for proceedings conducted by, or under 
     the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court.
       (b) Application.--
       (1) In general.--A State court or local court may submit an 
     application for a grant authorized under this section at such 
     time and in such manner as the Attorney General may 
     determine.
       (2) Information required.--An application for a grant 
     authorized under this section shall contain the following:
       (A) A description of a proposed plan for the development, 
     implementation, and maintenance of an automated data 
     collection and case-tracking system for proceedings conducted 
     by, or under the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court, 
     including a proposed budget for the plan and a request for a 
     specific funding amount.
       (B) A description of the extent to which such plan and 
     system are able to be replicated in abuse and neglect courts 
     of other jurisdictions that specifies the common case-
     tracking data elements of the proposed system, including, at 
     a minimum--
       (i) identification of relevant judges, court, and agency 
     personnel;
       (ii) records of all court proceedings with regard to the 
     abuse and neglect case, including all court findings and 
     orders (oral and written); and
       (iii) relevant information about the subject child, 
     including family information and the reason for court 
     supervision.
       (C) In the case of an application submitted by a local 
     court, a description of how the plan to implement the 
     proposed system was developed in consultation with related 
     State courts, particularly with regard to a State court 
     improvement plan funded under section 13712 of the Omnibus 
     Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 670 note) if 
     there is such a plan in the State.
       (D) In the case of an application that is submitted by a 
     State court, a description of how the proposed system will 
     integrate with a State court improvement plan funded under 
     section 13712 of such Act if there is such a plan in the 
     State.
       (E) After consultation with the State agency responsible 
     for the administration of parts B and E of title IV of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et seq.)--
       (i) a description of the coordination of the proposed 
     system with other child welfare data collection systems, 
     including the Statewide automated child welfare information 
     system (SACWIS) and the adoption and foster care analysis and 
     reporting system (AFCARS) established pursuant to section 479 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 679); and
       (ii) an assurance that such coordination will be 
     implemented and maintained.
       (F) Identification of an independent third party that will 
     conduct ongoing evaluations of the feasibility and 
     implementation of the plan and system and a description of 
     the plan for conducting such evaluations.
       (G) A description or identification of a proposed funding 
     source for completion of the plan (if applicable) and 
     maintenance of the system after the conclusion of the period 
     for which the grant is to be awarded.
       (H) An assurance that any contract entered into between the 
     State court or local court and any other entity that is to 
     provide services for the development, implementation, or 
     maintenance of the system under the proposed plan will 
     require the entity to agree to allow for replication of the 
     services provided, the plan, and the system, and to refrain 
     from asserting any proprietary interest in such services for 
     purposes of allowing the plan and system to be replicated in 
     another jurisdiction.
       (I) An assurance that the system established under the plan 
     will provide data that allows for evaluation (at least on an 
     annual basis) of the following information:
       (i) The total number of cases that are filed in the abuse 
     and neglect court.
       (ii) The number of cases assigned to each judge who 
     presides over the abuse and neglect court.
       (iii) The average length of stay of children in foster 
     care.
       (iv) With respect to each child under the jurisdiction of 
     the court--

       (I) the number of episodes of placement in foster care;
       (II) the number of days placed in foster care and the type 
     of placement (foster family home, group home, or special 
     residential care facility);

[[Page S3265]]

       (III) the number of days of in-home supervision; and
       (IV) the number of separate foster care placements.

       (v) The number of adoptions, guardianships, or other 
     permanent dispositions finalized.
       (vi) The number of terminations of parental rights.
       (vii) The number of child abuse and neglect proceedings 
     closed that had been pending for 2 or more years.
       (viii) With respect to each proceeding conducted by, or 
     under the supervision of, an abuse and neglect court--

       (I) the timeliness of each stage of the proceeding from 
     initial filing through legal finalization of a permanency 
     plan (for both contested and uncontested hearings);
       (II) the number of adjournments, delays, and continuances 
     occurring during the proceeding, including identification of 
     the party requesting each adjournment, delay, or continuance 
     and the reasons given for the request;
       (III) the number of courts that conduct or supervise the 
     proceeding for the duration of the abuse and neglect case;
       (IV) the number of judges assigned to the proceeding for 
     the duration of the abuse and neglect case; and
       (V) the number of agency attorneys, children's attorneys, 
     parent's attorneys, guardians ad litem, and volunteers 
     participating in a court-appointed special advocate (CASA) 
     program assigned to the proceeding during the duration of the 
     abuse and neglect case.

       (J) A description of how the proposed system will reduce 
     the need for paper files and ensure prompt action so that 
     cases are appropriately listed with national and regional 
     adoption exchanges, and public and private adoption services.
       (K) An assurance that the data collected in accordance with 
     subparagraph (I) will be made available to relevant Federal, 
     State, and local government agencies and to the public.
       (L) An assurance that the proposed system is consistent 
     with other civil and criminal information requirements of the 
     Federal government.
       (M) An assurance that the proposed system will provide 
     notice of timeframes required under the Adoption and Safe 
     Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89; 111 Stat. 2115) for 
     individual cases to ensure prompt attention and compliance 
     with such requirements.
       (c) Conditions for Approval of Applications.--
       (1) Matching requirement.--
       (A) In general.--A State court or local court awarded a 
     grant under this section shall expend $1 for every $3 awarded 
     under the grant to carry out the development, implementation, 
     and maintenance of the automated data collection and case-
     tracking system under the proposed plan.
       (B) Waiver for hardship.--The Attorney General may waive or 
     modify the matching requirement described in subparagraph (A) 
     in the case of any State court or local court that the 
     Attorney General determines would suffer undue hardship as a 
     result of being subject to the requirement.
       (C) Non-federal expenditures.--
       (i) Cash or in kind.--State court or local court 
     expenditures required under subparagraph (A) may be in cash 
     or in kind, fairly evaluated, including plant, equipment, or 
     services.
       (ii) No credit for pre-award expenditures.--Only State 
     court or local court expenditures made after a grant has been 
     awarded under this section may be counted for purposes of 
     determining whether the State court or local court has 
     satisfied the matching expenditure requirement under 
     subparagraph (A).
       (2) Notification to state or appropriate child welfare 
     agency.--No application for a grant authorized under this 
     section may be approved unless the State court or local court 
     submitting the application demonstrates to the satisfaction 
     of the Attorney General that the court has provided the 
     State, in the case of a State court, or the appropriate child 
     welfare agency, in the case of a local court, with notice of 
     the contents and submission of the application.
       (3) Considerations.--In evaluating an application for a 
     grant under this section the Attorney General shall consider 
     the following:
       (A) The extent to which the system proposed in the 
     application may be replicated in other jurisdictions.
       (B) The extent to which the proposed system is consistent 
     with the provisions of, and amendments made by, the Adoption 
     and Safe Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89; 111 Stat. 
     2115), and parts B and E of title IV of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 620 et seq.; 670 et seq.).
       (C) The extent to which the proposed system is feasible and 
     likely to achieve the purposes described in subsection 
     (a)(1).
       (4) Diversity of awards.--The Attorney General shall award 
     grants under this section in a manner that results in a 
     reasonable balance among grants awarded to State courts and 
     grants awarded to local courts, grants awarded to courts 
     located in urban areas and courts located in rural areas, and 
     grants awarded in diverse geographical locations.
       (d) Length of Awards.--No grant may be awarded under this 
     section for a period of more than 5 years.
       (e) Availability of Funds.--Funds provided to a State court 
     or local court under a grant awarded under this section shall 
     remain available until expended without fiscal year 
     limitation.
       (f) Reports.--
       (1) Annual report from grantees.--Each State court or local 
     court that is awarded a grant under this section shall submit 
     an annual report to the Attorney General that contains--
       (A) a description of the ongoing results of the independent 
     evaluation of the plan for, and implementation of, the 
     automated data collection and case-tracking system funded 
     under the grant; and
       (B) the information described in subsection (b)(2)(I).
       (2) Interim and final reports from attorney general.--
       (A) Interim reports.--Beginning 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and biannually thereafter until a 
     final report is submitted in accordance with subparagraph 
     (B), the Attorney General shall submit to Congress interim 
     reports on the grants made under this section.
       (B) Final report.--Not later than 90 days after the 
     termination of all grants awarded under this section, the 
     Attorney General shall submit to Congress a final report 
     evaluating the automated data collection and case-tracking 
     systems funded under such grants and identifying successful 
     models of such systems that are suitable for replication in 
     other jurisdictions. The Attorney General shall ensure that a 
     copy of such final report is transmitted to the highest State 
     court in each State.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     the period of fiscal years 2000 through 2004.

     SEC. 5. GRANTS TO REDUCE PENDING BACKLOGS OF ABUSE AND 
                   NEGLECT CASES TO PROMOTE PERMANENCY FOR ABUSED 
                   AND NEGLECTED CHILDREN.

       Part E of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     670 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 479B. GRANTS TO REDUCE BACKLOGS OF ABUSE AND NEGLECT 
                   CASES.

       ``(a) In General.--Subject to the amount appropriated under 
     subsection (f), the Secretary shall make grants to State 
     courts or local courts for the purposes of--
       ``(1) promoting the permanency goals established in the 
     Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89; 
     111 Stat. 2115); and
       ``(2) enabling such courts to reduce existing backlogs of 
     cases pending in abuse and neglect courts, especially with 
     respect to cases to terminate parental rights and cases in 
     which parental rights to a child have been terminated but an 
     adoption of the child has not yet been finalized.
       ``(b) Application.--A State court or local court shall 
     submit an application for a grant under this section, in such 
     form and manner as the Secretary shall require, that contains 
     a description of the following:
       ``(1) The barriers to achieving the permanency goals 
     established in the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 
     that have been identified.
       ``(2) The size and nature of the backlogs of children 
     awaiting termination of parental rights or finalization of 
     adoption.
       ``(3) The strategies the State court or local court 
     proposes to use to reduce such backlogs and the plan and 
     timetable for doing so.
       ``(4) How the grant funds requested will be used to assist 
     the implementation of the strategies described in paragraph 
     (3).
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--Funds provided under a grant awarded 
     under this section may be used for any purpose that the 
     Secretary determines is likely to successfully achieve the 
     purposes described in subsection (a), including temporarily--
       ``(1) establishing night court sessions for abuse and 
     neglect courts;
       ``(2) hiring additional judges, magistrates, commissioners, 
     hearing officers, referees, special masters, and other 
     judicial personnel for such courts;
       ``(3) hiring personnel such as clerks, administrative 
     support staff, case managers, mediators, and attorneys for 
     such courts; or
       ``(4) extending the operating hours of such courts.
       ``(d) Number of Grants.--Not less than 15 nor more than 20 
     grants shall be awarded under this section.
       ``(e) Availability of Funds.--Funds awarded under a grant 
     made under this section shall remain available for 
     expenditure by a grantee for a period not to exceed 3 years 
     from the date of the grant award.
       ``(f) Report on Use of Funds.--Not later than the date that 
     is halfway through the period for which a grant is awarded 
     under this section, and 90 days after the end of such period, 
     a State court or local court awarded a grant under this 
     section shall submit a report to the Secretary that includes 
     the following:
       ``(1) The barriers to the permanency goals established in 
     the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 that are or have 
     been addressed with grant funds.
       ``(2) The nature of the backlogs of children that were 
     pursued with grant funds.
       ``(3) The specific strategies used to reduce such backlogs.
       ``(4) The progress that has been made in reducing such 
     backlogs, including the number of children in such backlogs--

[[Page S3266]]

       ``(A) whose parental rights have been terminated; and
       ``(B) whose adoptions have been finalized.
       ``(5) Any additional information that the Secretary 
     determines would assist jurisdictions in achieving the 
     permanency goals established in the Adoption and Safe 
     Families Act of 1997.
       ``(g) Definition of abuse and neglect court.--In this 
     section, the term `abuse and neglect court' has the meaning 
     given that term in section 3(a) of the Strengthening Abuse 
     and Neglect Courts Act of 1999.
       ``(h) Appropriation.--Out of any money in the Treasury of 
     the United States not otherwise appropriated, there are 
     appropriated for fiscal year 2000 $10,000,000 for the purpose 
     of making grants under this section.''.

     SEC. 6. TRAINING IN CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT PROCEEDINGS.

       (a) In General.--Section 474(a)(3) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 674(a)(3)) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), and (E) as 
     subparagraphs (D), (E), and (F), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (B), the following:
       ``(C) 75 percent of so much of such expenditures as are for 
     the training (including cross-training with personnel 
     employed by, or under contract with, the State or local 
     agency administering the plan in the political subdivision, 
     training on topics relevant to the legal representation of 
     clients in proceedings conducted by or under the supervision 
     of an abuse and neglect court (as defined in section 3(a) of 
     the Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 1999), and 
     training on related topics such as child development and the 
     importance of developing a trusting relationship with a 
     child) of judges, judicial personnel, law enforcement 
     personnel, agency attorneys (as defined in section 3(b) of 
     such Act), attorneys representing parents in proceedings 
     conducted by, or under the supervision of, an abuse and 
     neglect court (as so defined), attorneys representing 
     children in such proceedings, guardians ad litem, and 
     volunteers who participate in court-appointed special 
     advocate (CASA) programs, to the extent such training is 
     related to provisions of, and amendments made by, the 
     Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89; 
     111 Stat. 2115), provided that any such training that is 
     offered to judges or other judicial personnel shall be 
     offered by, or under contract with, the State or local agency 
     in collaboration with the judicial conference or other 
     appropriate judicial governing body operating in the 
     State,''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Section 473(a)(6)(B) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     673(a)(6)(B)) is amended by striking ``474(a)(3)(E)'' and 
     inserting ``474(a)(3)(F)''.
       (2) Section 474(a)(3)(D) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     674(a)(3)(D)) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)(A)) is 
     amended by striking ``subparagraph (C)'' and inserting 
     ``subparagraph (D)''.
       (3) Section 474(c) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 674(c)) is 
     amended by striking ``subsection (a)(3)(C)'' and inserting 
     ``subsection (a)(3)(D)''.

     SEC. 7. STATE STANDARDS FOR AGENCY ATTORNEYS.

       Section 471(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     671(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (22), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (23), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(24) provides that, not later than January 1, 2001, the 
     State shall develop and encourage the implementation of 
     guidelines for all agency attorneys (as defined in section 
     3(b) of the Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 
     1999), including legal education requirements for such 
     attorneys regarding the handling of abuse, neglect, and 
     dependency proceedings.''.

     SEC. 8. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR CHILD ABUSE, NEGLECT, AND 
                   DEPENDENCY MATTERS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services, in coordination with the Attorney General, shall 
     provide the technical assistance, training, and evaluations 
     authorized under this section through grants, contracts, or 
     cooperative arrangements with other entities, including 
     universities, and national, State, and local organizations. 
     The Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Attorney 
     General should ensure that entities that have not had a 
     previous contractual relationship with the Department of 
     Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, or 
     another Federal agency can compete for grants for technical 
     assistance, training, and evaluations.
       (b) Purpose.--Technical assistance shall be provided under 
     this section for the purpose of supporting and assisting 
     State and local courts that handle child abuse, neglect, and 
     dependency matters to effectively carry out new 
     responsibilities enacted as part of the Adoption and Safe 
     Families Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-89; 111 Stat. 2115) and 
     to speed the process of adoption of children and legal 
     finalization of permanent families for children in foster 
     care by improving practices of the courts involved in that 
     process.
       (c) Activities.--Technical assistance consistent with the 
     purpose described in subsection (b) may be provided under 
     this section through the following:
       (1) The dissemination of information, existing and 
     effective models, and technical assistance to State and local 
     courts that receive grants under section 4 concerning the 
     automated data collection and case-tracking systems and 
     outcome measures required under that section.
       (2) The provision of specialized training on child 
     development that is appropriate for judges, referees, 
     nonjudicial decision-makers, administrative, and other court-
     related personnel, and for agency attorneys, attorneys 
     representing children, guardians ad litem, volunteers who 
     participate in court-appointed special advocate (CASA) 
     programs, or parents.
       (3) The provision of assistance and dissemination of 
     information about best practices of abuse and neglect courts 
     for effective case management strategies and techniques, 
     including automated data collection and case-tracking 
     systems, assessments of caseload and staffing levels, 
     management of court dockets, timely decision-making at all 
     stages of a proceeding conducted by, or under the supervision 
     of, an abuse and neglect court, and the development of 
     streamlined case flow procedures, case management models, 
     early case resolution programs, mechanisms for monitoring 
     compliance with the terms of court orders, models for 
     representation of children, automated interagency interfaces 
     between data bases, and court rules that facilitate timely 
     case processing.
       (4) The development and dissemination of training models 
     for judges, attorneys representing children, agency 
     attorneys, guardians ad litem, and volunteers who participate 
     in court-appointed special advocate (CASA) programs.
       (5) The development of standards of practice for agency 
     attorneys, attorneys representing children, guardians ad 
     litem, volunteers who participate in court-appointed special 
     advocate (CASA) programs, and parents in such proceedings.
       (d) Training Requirement.--Any training offered in 
     accordance with this section to judges or other judicial 
     personnel shall be offered in collaboration with the judicial 
     conference or other appropriate judicial governing body 
     operating with respect to the State in which the training is 
     offered.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to carry out this section $5,000,000 for the period of fiscal 
     years 2000 through 2004.

     SEC. 9. GRANTS TO EXPAND THE COURT-APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATE 
                   PROGRAM IN UNDERSERVED AREAS.

       (a) Grants To Expand CASA Programs in Underserved Areas.--
     The Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention of the Department of Justice shall 
     make a grant to the National Court-Appointed Special Advocate 
     Association for the purposes of--
       (1) expanding the recruitment of, and building the capacity 
     of, court-appointed special advocate programs located in the 
     15 largest urban areas;
       (2) developing regional, multijurisdictional court-
     appointed special advocate programs serving rural areas; and
       (3) providing training and supervision of volunteers in 
     court-appointed special advocate programs.
       (b) Limitation on Administrative Expenditures.--Not more 
     than 5 percent of the grant made under this subsection may be 
     used for administrative expenditures.
       (c) Determination of Urban and Rural Areas.--For purposes 
     of administering the grant authorized under this subsection, 
     the Administrator of the Office of Juvenile Justice and 
     Delinquency Prevention of the Department of Justice shall 
     determine whether an area is one of the 15 largest urban 
     areas or a rural area in accordance with the practices of, 
     and statistical information compiled by, the Bureau of the 
     Census.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to make the grant authorized under this 
     section, $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2000.

 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to join Mr. 
DeWine in his introduction of the Strengthening Abuse and Neglect 
Courts Act. I would like to thank Mr. DeWine for his leadership on 
behalf of vulnerable children, including our bipartisan work on this 
legislation. Work on this legislation is based on the bipartisan work 
of the Senate coalition that supported the 1997 Adoption and Safe 
Families Act.
  A unique bipartisan coalition formed in 1997 worked hard to forge 
consensus on the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. This law, for 
the first time ever, establishes that a child's health and safety must 
be paramount when any decisions are made regarding children in the 
abuse and neglect system. The law was the most sweeping and 
comprehensive piece of child welfare legislation passed in over a 
decade. It promotes safety, stability and permanence for all abused and 
neglected children and requires timely decision-making in all 
proceedings to determine whether children can safely return home, or 
whether they should be moved to permanent, adoptive homes. More 
specifically, the law requires a State to move to terminate the 
parental rights of any parent whose child has been in foster care for 
15 out of the last 22 months.

[[Page S3267]]

  Throughout the process of developing the Adoption Act we heard about 
the vital role the Nation's abuse and neglect courts play in achieving 
the goals of safety and permanence for children. We also heard that 
these courts were seriously overburdened and challenged by insufficient 
resources. Now, nearly a year and a half after the passage of the law, 
courts are struggling to meet the guidelines. Judges and child welfare 
professionals in my state of West Virginia tell me that the law is 
helping move children through the system more quickly, that the 
accelerated timelines are, indeed, essential for the protection of 
children, and that the effect of this is that the courts are becoming 
even more overburdened. We are hearing this same type of feedback from 
other judges and child advocates around the country.
  These courts--and the judges, lawyers and other court personnel--make 
some of the most difficult and important decisions made by any members 
of the judiciary. Adjudications of abuse and neglect, terminations of 
parental rights, approval of adoptions, and life-changing 
determinations require the appropriate level of information, 
thoughtfulness and care. Judges throughout the country, like West 
Virginia's Chief Justice Margaret Workman, are committed to the fair 
and efficient administration of justice in these cases. In 1987, just 
over 2 million children, nationally, were reported or neglected. By 
1997, this number had swelled to well over 3 million children. During 
this period, my own state of West Virginia experienced a 100% increase 
in child abuse cases. These staggering increases in child abuse have 
placed an unconscionable burden on these courts.

  Working within their own communities, judges, attorneys, volunteers 
from the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) programs and others 
have found creative and effective new ways to eliminate their caseload 
backlogs and move children more efficiently and safely through the 
court system. In West Virginia, Judge Workman and others have developed 
a comprehensive plan to increase the accountability and efficient 
administration of abuse and neglect cases. In Cincinatti, Ohio, Judge 
Grossman's abuse and neglect courts have implemented state-of-the-art 
computer tracking systems which help them smooth the legal paths of 
children in foster care.
  Even when courts have the dedication and initiative to implement 
these innovative reforms, they simply cannot do it without sufficient 
resources. The purpose of the Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts 
Act is to help remove the burdens on an ever greater number of courts 
by increasing both their efficiency and their effectiveness. The bill 
provides much needed resources and allows state and local communities 
the flexibility to develop their own solutions to administrative 
problems and caseload backlogs. In January of this year, the General 
Accounting Office released a report conducted at the request of Ways 
and Means Subcommittee on Human Resources Chairman Shaw, which 
concluded that there are three essential ingredients for successful 
court reform, all of which are incorporated in this Act. There are four 
ways this bill will help abuse and neglect courts better serve children 
and families.
  The bill first provides a program of grants to states and local 
courts for the implementation of computerized case-tracking systems, 
similar to the one Judge Grossman created in Ohio. Through the 
establishment of such systems, courts are able to more easily track how 
long a child spends in foster care and the status of their cases. When 
courts have such ``user-friendly'' access to vital case information 
children truly benefit--they move more quickly through foster care and 
on to adoptive homes or other permanent placements. This grant program 
will enable state and local courts to design similar computer systems, 
to replicate models that have proven successful in other jurisdictions 
and to receive technical assistance as they implement their new 
programs.
  A second important provision of the bill is the grant program that 
provides State and local courts the resources they need to eliminate 
the backlog of abuse and neglect cases. Throughout the discussions on 
the Adoption and Safe Families Act, we heard from dozens of judges and 
advocates who said that far and away the biggest problem facing their 
courts was the overwhelming backlog of these cases. Without creative 
ways to eliminate these backlogs, and with the tightened timeframes we 
created with the new law, the judges emphasized that children's cases 
will simply not move through the court system in a timely manner. Each 
court may have their own effective approach to eliminating such 
backlogs. For some, hiring additional staff may be necessary. For 
others, creating a ``Night Court'' or ``Saturday Court'' to hear these 
cases would work. Still others may need to restructure duties of court 
personnel. This bill will provide grants to those court projects that 
are designed to result in the effective and rapid elimination of 
current backlogs to smooth the way for more efficient courts in the 
future.

  The Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act also recognizes that 
judges, attorneys, court personnel, law enforcement representatives, 
guardians-ad-litem and all others who participate in abuse and neglect 
proceedings can benefit from continuing education opportunities, 
improved training and the development of models for effective practice 
in these settings. The Act, therefore, extends federal reimbursement 
for training that is currently provided to agency caseworkers to 
judges, attorneys and key court personnel who must make decision 
effecting the lives and future of vulnerable children. In addition to 
this basic, necessary training for court personnel, we hope it will 
also foster between cooperation between child welfare agencies and 
court personnel that is imperative to make system work to ensure the 
health and safety of children.
  Finally, the bill provides for an expansion of the successful CASA--
Court Appointed Special Advocates--volunteer program. This superb 
volunteer program has demonstrated its ability to improve outcomes for 
abused and neglected children. CASA are volunteers specially trained to 
speak for the best interests of children who have been abused or 
neglected. There are over 710 CASA programs nationwide, whose 
volunteers represented nearly 200,000 children last year alone. 
Recently, the Department of Justice recognized CASA as an ``Exemplary 
Program''. CASA has been operating in West Virginia since 1991 with 
programs currently serving children in 13 of our counties. Of course, 
there is more work to be done so that children in all 55 West Virginia 
counties, and all under-served areas throughout the country can benefit 
from the services of these trained and dedicated volunteers. In fact, 
despite CASA's phenomenal volunteer commitment and national praise by 
courts, and community leaders, 70% of the children in foster care are 
still without CASA representation. This bill will begin to address this 
gap by providing a $5 million grant to expand its programs into under-
served areas and to improve its ability to recruit, train and supervise 
volunteers.
  When we talk about how to help abused and neglected children in this 
country, our abuse and neglect courts are too often left out of the 
discussion. With the numbers of abused and neglected children rising 
dramatically--in West Virginia alone child abuse reports have doubled--
from 13,000 in 1986 to over 26,000 in 1996--we need to include every 
system in our efforts to make a difference. The courts play a crucial 
role and I am confident that the Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts 
Act will be a valuable step in making our courts stronger, more 
efficient and more able to effectively address the needs of our 
Nation's most vulnerable children. I ask that my colleagues join us in 
this important effort.
  I ask that a fact sheet about the bill be printed in the Record.
  The material follows:

        Fact Sheet--Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Act of 1999

       A bill to improve the administrative efficiency and 
     effectiveness of the Nation's abuse and neglect courts and 
     the quality and availability of training for judges, 
     attorneys, and volunteers working in such courts, and for 
     other purposes consistent with the Adoption and Safe Families 
     Act of 1997.


          section 1, 3, & 3: title, findings, and definitions

       The Strengthening Abuse and Neglect Courts Act of 1999

[[Page S3268]]

 Section 4: grants to courts for computer automation and case tracking 
                                systems

       A program to provide competitive state and local grants to 
     abuse and neglect courts to create computerized case tracking 
     systems, and to encourage the replication and implementation 
     of successful systems in other court systems. Grant will be 
     awarded based on eligibility criteria designed to encourage 
     applications from both state and local courts, and a balance 
     of urban and rural courts. Guidelines will also ensure that 
     successful models can be disseminated to other courts. 
     Applicants will need to include evaluation plans as part of 
     the grant request.
       Grant program is $10 million, with a 25% state matching 
     requirement, but a hardship exemption.


    section 5: grants to reduce backlogs of abuse and neglect cases

       A program to provide grants to court systems to reduce 
     pending backlogs of abuse and neglect cases so that courts 
     are able to comply with the time frames established in the 
     Adoption and Safe Families Act. Competitive grants will be 
     awarded to court systems to reduce backlogs by using night 
     court sessions, hiring additional personnel to manage reduce 
     caseloads, or other innovative strategies.
       Grant program is $10 million, and courts can use funding 
     for up to 3 years.


           section 6: training for judges and court personnel

       A provision to allow judges, attorneys, and court personnel 
     to qualify for training under Title IV-E's existing training 
     provisions, which is a federal-state matching program set at 
     75%-25%.
       CBO to score provision.


            section 7: state standards for agency attorneys

       States shall develop and encourage by January 1, 2001, 
     basic guidelines for education and training needed to handle 
     abuse and neglect cases within the state and local court 
     systems.


section 8: technical assistance for child abuse, neglect and dependency 
                                matters

       A program for competitive grants, administered by HHS in 
     coordination with the Attorney General, to provide technical 
     assistance to state and local courts to carry out their new 
     responsibilities, including efforts to speed the process of 
     adoption of children.
       Technical assistance will be $5 million for each year, from 
     2000 to 2004, for a five year total of $25 million.


   section 9: grants to expand the court-appointed special advocates 
                  (casa) program in underserved areas

       A special grant program to expand the well-respected CASA 
     program to the most needy areas, including the 15 largest 
     urban areas and regional programs for rural areas.
       A single start up grant of $5 million in 2000.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Daschle):
  S. 709. A bill to amend the Housing and Community Development Act of 
1974 to establish and sustain viable rural and remote communities, and 
to provide affordable housing and community development assistance to 
rural areas with excessively high rates of outmigration and low per 
capital income levels; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.


              THE RURAL AND REMOTE COMMUNITY FAIRNESS ACT

  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Rural and 
Remote Community Fairness Act. This Act will lead to a brighter future 
for rural and remote communities by establishing three new programs 
that will address the unique economic and environmental challenges 
faced by small communities in rural and remote areas across this 
country. I am pleased that this legislation is co-sponsored by the 
Minority Leader, Senator Daschle.
  The bill authorizes up to $100 million a year in grant aid from 2000 
through 2006 for any communities across the nation with populations of 
less than 10,000 which face electric rates in excess of 150 percent of 
the national average retail price. The money can go for electricity 
system improvements, energy efficiency and weatherization efforts, 
water and sanitation improvements or work to solve leaking fuel storage 
tanks.
  The bill also amends the Rural Electrification Act to authorize Rural 
and Remote Electrification Grants of an additional $20 million a year 
to the same communities. The grants can be used to increase energy 
efficiency, lower electricity rates or provide for the modernization of 
electric facilities.
  The bill also establishes a new program providing rural recovery 
community development block grants. This will provide for the 
development and maintenance of viable rural areas through the provision 
of affordable housing and community development assistance for rural 
areas with excessively high rates of outmigration and low per capita 
income levels.
  This nation has well-established programs for community development 
grants. The majority of these programs were established to help resolve 
the very real problems found in this Nation's urban areas. However, our 
most rural and remote communities experience different, but equally 
real, problems that are not addressed by existing law. Not only are 
these communities generally ineligible for the existing programs, their 
unique challenges, while sometimes similar to those experienced by 
urban areas, require a different focus and approach.
  The biggest single economic problem facing small communities is the 
expense of establishing a modern infrastructure. These costs, which are 
always substantial, are exacerbated in remote and rural areas. The 
existence of this infrastructure, including efficient housing, 
electricity, bulk fuel storage, waste water and water service, is a 
necessity for the health and welfare of our children, the development 
of a prosperous economy and minimizing environmental problems.
  There is a real cost in human misery and to the health and welfare of 
everyone, especially our children and our elderly from poor or polluted 
water or bad housing or an inefficient power system. Hepatitis B 
infections in rural Alaska are five times more common than in urban 
Alaska. We just have to do better if we are to bring our rural 
communities into the 21 Century.
  The experience of many of Alaskans is a perfect example. Most small 
communities or villages in Alaska are not interconnected to an 
electricity grid, and rely upon diesel generators for their 
electricity. Often, the fuel can only be delivered by barge or 
airplane, and is stored in tanks. These tanks are expensive to 
maintain, and in many cases, must be completely replaced to prevent 
leakage of fuel into the environment. While the economic and 
environmental savings clearly justify the construction of new 
facilities, these communities simply don't have the ability to raise 
enough capital to make the necessary investments.
  As a result, these communities are forced to bear an oppressive 
economic and environmental burden that can be eased with a relatively 
small investment on the part of the Federal government. I can give you 
some examples: in Manley Hot Springs, Alaska, the citizens pay almost 
70 cents per kilowatt hour for electricity. In Igiugig, Kokhanok, 
Akiachak Native Community, and Middle Kuskokwim, consumers all pay over 
50 cents per kilowatt hour for electricity. The national average is 
around 7 cents per kilowatt hour.
  Further, in Alaska, for example, many rural villages still lack 
modern water and sewer sanitation systems taken for granted in all 
other areas of America. According to a Federal Field Working Group, 190 
of the state's villages have ``unsafe" sanitation systems, 135 villages 
still using ``honey buckets'' for waste disposal. Only 31 villages have 
a fully safe, piped water system; 71 villages having only one central 
watering source.
  These are not only an Alaskan problem. The highest electricity rates 
in America are paid by a small community in Missouri, and communities 
in Maine, as well as islands in Rhode Island and New York will likely 
qualify for this program. Providing safe drinking water and adequate 
waste treatment facilities is a problem for very small communities all 
across this land.
  What will this Act do to address these problems? First, the Act 
authorizes $100 million per year for the years 2000-2006 for block 
grants to communities of under 10,000 inhabitants who pay more than 
150% of the national average retail price for electricity.
  The grants will be allocated by the Secretary of Housing and 
Urban Development among eligible communities proportionate to cost of 
electricity in the community, as compared to the National average. The 
communities may use the grants only for the following eligible 
activities:

       Low-cost weatherization of homes and other buildings;
       Construction and repair of electrical generation, 
     transmission, distribution, and related facilities;
       Construction, remediation and repair of bulk fuel storage 
     facilities;
       Facilities and training to reduce costs of maintaining and 
     operating electrical generation, distribution, transmission, 
     and related facilities;

[[Page S3269]]

       Professional management and maintenance for electrical 
     generation, distribution and transmission, and related 
     facilities;
       Investigation of the feasibility of alternate energy 
     services;
       Construction, operation, maintenance and repair of water 
     and waste water services;
       Acquisition and disposition of real property for eligible 
     activities and facilities; and
       Development of an implementation plan, including 
     administrative costs for eligible activities and facilities.

  In addition this bill will amend the Rural Electrification Act of 
1936 to authorize Rural and Remote Electrification Grants for $20 
million per year for years 2000-2006 for grants to qualified borrowers 
under the Act that are in rural and remote communities who pay more 
than 150% of the national average retail price for electricity. These 
grants can be used to increase energy efficiency, lower electricity 
rates, or provide or modernize electric facilities.
  This Act makes a significant step toward resolving the critical 
social, economic and environmental problems faced by our Nation's rural 
and remote communities. I encourage my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
  For the information of the Senate and the public, the bill can also 
be obtained from the Internet at: http://thomas.loc.gov.
 Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 709

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Rural and Remote Community 
     Fairness Act.''

      TITLE I--RURAL AND REMOTE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS

       The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (Public 
     Law 93-383) is amended by inserting at the end the following 
     new title:

    ``TITLE IX--RURAL AND REMOTE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS


                         ``findings and purpose

       ``Sec. 901. (a) Findings.--The Congress finds and declares 
     that--
       ``(1) a modern infrastructure, including efficient housing, 
     electricity, bulk fuel, waste water and water service, is a 
     necessary ingredient of a modern society and development of a 
     prosperous economy with minimal environmental impacts;
       ``(2) the Nation's rural and remote communities face 
     critical social, economic and environmental problems, arising 
     in significant measure from the high cost of infrastructure 
     development in sparsely populated and remote areas, that are 
     not adequately addressed by existing Federal assistance 
     programs;
       ``(3) in the past, Federal assistance has been instrumental 
     in establishing electric and other utility service in many 
     developing regions of the Nation, and that Federal assistance 
     continues to be appropriate to ensure that electric and other 
     utility systems in rural areas conform with modern standards 
     of safety, reliability, efficiency and environmental 
     protection; and
       ``(4) the future welfare of the Nation and the well-being 
     of its citizens depend on the establishment and maintenance 
     of viable rural and remote communities as social, economic 
     and political entities.
       ``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this title is the 
     development and maintenance of viable rural and remote 
     communities through the provision of efficient housing, and 
     reasonably priced and environmentally sound energy, water, 
     waste water, and bulk fuel and utility services to those 
     communities that do not have those services or who currently 
     bear costs for those services that are significantly above 
     the national average.


                             ``definitions

       ``Sec. 902. As used in this title:
       ``(1) The term `unit of general local government' means any 
     city, county, town, township, parish, village, borough 
     (organized or unorganized) or other general purpose political 
     subdivision of a State, Guam, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, the Republic of the 
     Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the 
     Republic of Palau, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa; a 
     combination of such political subdivisions that is recognized 
     by the Secretary; and the District of Columbia; or any other 
     appropriate organization of citizens of a rural and remote 
     community that the Secretary may identify.
       ``(2) The term `population' means total resident population 
     based on data compiled by the United States Bureau of the 
     Census and referable to the same point or period in time.
       ``(3) The term `Native American group' means any Indian 
     tribe, band group, and nation, including Alaska Indians, 
     Aleuts, and Eskimos, and any Alaskan Native Village, of the 
     United States, which is considered an eligible recipient 
     under the Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance 
     Act (Public Law 93-638) or was considered an eligible 
     recipient under chapter 67 of title 31, United States Code, 
     prior to the repeal of such chapter.
       ``(4) The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development.
       ``(5) The term `rural and remote community' means a unit of 
     local general government or Native American group which 
     represents or contains a population not in excess of 10,000 
     permanent inhabitants, and that has an average retail cost 
     per kilowatt hour of electricity that is equal to or 
     greater than 150 percent of the average retail cost per 
     kilowatt hour of electricity for all consumers in the 
     United States, as determined by data provided by the 
     Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration.
       ``(6) The term alternative energy sources include non-
     traditional means of providing electrical energy, including, 
     but not limited to, wind, solar, biomass, geothermal and 
     tidal power.
       ``(7) The term `average retail cost per kilowatt hour of 
     electricity' has the same meaning as `average revenue per 
     kilowatthour of electricity' as defined by the Energy 
     Information Administration.


                            ``authorizations

       ``Sec. 903. The Secretary is authorized to make grants to 
     rural and remote communities to carry out activities in 
     accordance with the provisions of this title. For purposes of 
     assistance under section 906, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000 
     through 2006.


                  ``statement of activities and review

       ``Sec. 904. (a) Prior to the receipt in any fiscal year of 
     a grant under section 906 by any rural and remote community, 
     the grantee shall have prepared and submitted to the 
     Secretary a final statement of rural and remote community 
     development objectives and projected use of funds.
       ``(b) In order to permit public examination and appraisal 
     of such statements, to enhance the public accountability of 
     grantees, and to facilitate coordination of activities with 
     different levels of government, the grantee shall in a timely 
     manner--
       ``(1) furnish citizens informaiton concerning the amount of 
     funds available for rural and remote community development 
     activities and the range of activities that may be 
     undertaken;
       ``(2) publish a proposed statement in such manner to afford 
     affected citizens an opportunity to examine its content and 
     to submit comments on the proposed statement and on the 
     community development performance of the grantee;
       ``(3) provide citizens with reasonable access to records 
     regarding the past use of funds received under section 906 by 
     the grantee; and
       ``(4) provide citizens with reasonable notice of, and 
     opportunity to comment on, any substantial change proposed to 
     be made in the use of funds received under section 906 from 
     one eligible activity to another.

     The final statement shall be made available to the public, 
     and a copy shall be furnished to the Secretary. Any final 
     statement of activities may be modified or amended from time 
     to time by the grantee in accordance with the same procedures 
     requried in this paragraph for the preparation and submission 
     of such statement.
       ``(c) Each grantee shall submit to the Secretary, at a time 
     determined by the Secretary, a performacne and evaluation 
     report, concerning the use of funds made available under 
     section 906, together with an assessment by the grantee of 
     the relationship of such use to the objectives identified in 
     the grantee's statement under subsection (a) and to the 
     requirements of subsection (b). The grantee's report shall 
     indicate its programmatic accomplishments, the nature of and 
     reasons for any changes in the grantee's program objectives, 
     and indications of how the grantee would change its programs 
     as a result of its experiences.
       ``(d) Any rural and remote community may retain any program 
     income that is realized from any grant made by the Secretary 
     under section 906 if (1) such income was realized after the 
     initial disbursement of the funds received by such unit of 
     general local government under such section; and (2) such 
     unit of general local government has agreed that it will 
     utilize the program income for eligible rural and remote 
     community development activities in accordance with the 
     provisions of this title; except that the Secretary may, by 
     regulation, exclude from consideration as program income any 
     amounts determined to be so small that compliance with this 
     subsection creates an unreasonable administrative burden on 
     the rural and remote community.


                         ``eligible activities

       ``Sec. 905. (a) Eligible activities assisted under title 
     may include only--
       ``(1) the provision of assistance, including loans, grants, 
     and services, for low-cost weatherization and other cost-
     effective energy-related repair of homes and other buildings;
       ``(2) the acquisition, construction, repair, 
     reconstruction, or installation of reliable and cost-
     efficient facilities for the generation, transmission or 
     distribution of electricity for consumption in a rural and 
     remote community or communities;
       ``(3) the acquisition, construction, repair, 
     reconstruction, remediation or installation of facilities for 
     the safe storage and efficient management of bulk fuel by 
     rural and remote communities, and facilities for the 
     distribution of such fuel to consumers in a rural and remote 
     community or communities;

[[Page S3270]]

       ``(4) facilities and training to reduce costs of 
     maintaining and operating generation, distribution or 
     transmission systems to a rural and remote community or 
     communities;
       ``(5) the institution of professional management and 
     maintenance services for electricity generation, transmission 
     or distribution to a rural and remote community or 
     communities;
       ``(6) the investigation of the feasibility of alternate 
     energy sources for a rural and remote community or 
     communities;
       ``(7) acquisition, construction, repair, reconstruction, 
     operation, maintenance, or installation of facilities for 
     water or waste water service;
       ``(8) the acquisition or disposition of real property 
     (including air rights, water rights, and other interest 
     therein) for eligible rural and remote community development 
     activities; and
       ``(9) activities necessary to develop and implement a 
     comprehensive rural and remote development plan, including 
     payment of reasonable administrative costs related to 
     planning and execution of rural and remote community 
     development activities.
       ``(b) Eligible activities may be undertaken either directly 
     by the rural and remote community, or by the rural and remote 
     community through local electric utilities.


                 ``allocation and distribution of funds

       ``Sec. 906. For each fiscal year, of the amount approved in 
     an appropriation Act under section 903 for grants in any 
     year, the Secretary shall distribute to each rural and remote 
     community which has filed a final statement of rural and 
     remote community development objectives and projected use of 
     funds under section 904, an amount which shall be allocated 
     among the rural and remote communities that filed a final 
     statement of rural and remote community development 
     objectives and projected use of funds under section 904 
     proportionate to the percentage that the average retail cost 
     per kilowatt hour of electricity for all classes of consumers 
     in the rural and remote community exceeds the national 
     average retail cost per kilowatt hour for electricity for all 
     consumers in the United States, as determined by data 
     provided by the Department of Energy's Energy Information 
     Administration. In allocating funds under this section, the 
     Secretary shall give special consideration to those rural and 
     remote communities that increase economies of scale through 
     consolidation of services, affiliation and regionalization of 
     eligible activities under this title.


                      ``remedies for noncompliance

       ``Sec. 907. The provisions of section 111 of the Housing 
     and Community Development Act of 1974 shall apply to 
     assistance distributed under this title.''.

      TITLE II--RURAL AND REMOTE COMMUNITY ELECTRIFICATION GRANTS

       After section 313(b) of the Rural Electrification Act of 
     1936, add the following new subsection:
       ``(c) Rural and Remote Community Electrification Grants.--
     The Secretary is authorized to provide grants to eligible 
     borrowers under this Act for the purpose of increasing energy 
     efficiency, lowering or stabilizing electric rates to end 
     users, or providing or modernizing electric facilities in 
     rural and remote communities that have an average retail cost 
     per kilowatt hour of electricity that is equal to or greater 
     than 150 percent of the average retail cost per kilowatt hour 
     of electricity for all consumers in the United States, as 
     determined by data provided by the Department of Energy's 
     Energy Information Administration.
       ``(d) For purposes of subsection (c), there is authorized 
     to be appropriated $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2000-
     2006.''.

      TITLE III--RURAL RECOVERY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS

       The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 
     U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 123. RURAL RECOVERY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK 
                   GRANTS.

       ``(a) Findings; Purpose.--
       ``(1) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       ``(A) a modern infrastructure, including affordable 
     housing, wastewater and water service, and advanced 
     technology capabilities is a necessary ingredient of a modern 
     society and development of a prosperous economy with minimal 
     environmental impacts;
       ``(B) the Nation's rural areas face critical social, 
     economic, and environmental problems, arising in significant 
     measure from the growing cost of infrastructure development 
     in rural areas that suffer from low per capita income and 
     high rates of outmigration and are not adequately addressed 
     by existing Federal assistance programs; and
       ``(C) the future welfare of the Nation and the well-being 
     of its citizens depend on the establishment and maintenance 
     of viable rural areas as social, economic, and political 
     entities.
       ``(2) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to provide 
     for the development and maintenance of viable rural areas 
     through the provision of affordable housing and community 
     development assistance to eligible units of general local 
     government and eligible Native American groups in rural areas 
     with excessively high rates of outmigration and low per 
     capita income levels.
       ``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Eligible unit of general local government.--The term 
     `eligible unit of general local government' means a unit of 
     general local government that is the governing body of a 
     rural recovery area.
       ``(2) Eligible indian tribe.--The term `eligible Indian 
     tribe' means the governing body of an Indian tribe that is 
     located in a rural recovery area.
       ``(3) Grantee.--The term `grantee' means an eligible unit 
     of general local government or eligible Indian tribe that 
     receives a grant under this section.
       ``(4) Native american group.--The term `Native American 
     group' means any Indian tribe, band, group, and nation, 
     including Alaska Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos, and any 
     Alaskan Native Village, of the United States, which is 
     considered an eligible recipient under the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (Public Law 93-
     638) or was considered an eligible recipient under chapter 67 
     of title 31, United States Code, prior to the repeal of such 
     chapter.
       ``(5) Rural recovery area.--The term `rural recovery area' 
     means any geographic area represented by a unit of general 
     local government or a native American group--
       ``(A) the borders of which are not adjacent to a 
     metropolitan area;
       ``(B) in which--
       ``(i) the population outmigration level equals or exceeds 1 
     percent over the most recent five year period, as determined 
     by the Secretary of Agriculture, and,
       ``(ii) the per capita income is less than that of the 
     national nonmetropolitan average; and
       ``(C) that does not include a city with a population or 
     more than 15,000.
       ``(6) Unit of general local government.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `unit of general local 
     government' means any city, county, town, township, parish, 
     village, borough (organized or unorganized), or other general 
     purpose political subdivision of a State; Guam, the Northern 
     Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and 
     American Samoa, or a general purpose political subdivision 
     thereof; a combination of such political subdivisions that, 
     except as provided in section 106(d)(4), is recognized by the 
     Secretary; the District of Columbia; and the Trust Territory 
     of the Pacific Islands.
       ``(B) Other entities included.--The term also includes a 
     State or a local public body or agency (as defined in section 
     711 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970), 
     community association, or other entity, that is approved by 
     the Secretary for the purpose of providing public facilities 
     or services to a new community as part of a program meeting 
     the eligibility standards of section 712 of the Housing and 
     Urban Development Act of 1970 or title IV of the Housing and 
     Urban Development Act of 1968.
       ``(c) Grant Authority.--The Secretary may make grants in 
     accordance with this section to eligible units of general 
     local government Native American groups and eligible Indian 
     tribes that meet the requirements of subsection (d) to carry 
     out eligible activities described in subsection (f).
       ``(d) Eligibility Requirements.--
       ``(1) Statement of rural development objectives.--In order 
     to receive a grant under this section for a fiscal year, an 
     eligible unit of general local government, Native American 
     group or eligible Indian tribe--
       ``(A) shall--
       ``(i) publish a proposed statement of rural development 
     objectives and a description of the proposed eligible 
     activities described in subsection (f) for which the grant 
     will be used; and
       ``(ii) afford residents of the rural recovery area served 
     by the eligible unit of general local government, Native 
     American groups or eligible Indian tribe with an opportunity 
     to examine the contents of the proposed statement and the 
     proposed eligible activities published under clause (i), and 
     to submit comments to the eligible unit of general local 
     government, Native American group or eligible Indian tribe, 
     as applicable, on--
       ``(I) the proposed statement and the proposed eligible 
     activities; and
       ``(II) the overall community development performance of the 
     eligible unit of general local government, Native American 
     groups or eligible Indian tribe, as applicable; and
       ``(B) based on any comments received under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii), prepare and submit to the Secretary--
       ``(i) a final statement of rural development objectives;
       ``(ii) a description of the eligible activities described 
     in subsection (f) for which a grant received under this 
     section will be used; and
       ``(iii) a certification that the eligible unit of general 
     local government, Native American groups or eligible Indian 
     tribe, as applicable, will comply with the requirements of 
     paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Public notice and comment.--In order to enhance 
     public accountability and facilitate the coordination of 
     activities among different levels of government, an eligible 
     unit of general local government, Native American groups or 
     eligible Indian tribe that receives a grant under this 
     section shall, as soon as practicable after such receipt, 
     provide the residents of the rural recovery area served by 
     the eligible unit of general local government, Native 
     American groups or eligible Indian tribe, as applicable, 
     with--
       ``(A) a copy of the final statement submitted under 
     paragraph (1)(B);
       ``(B) information concerning the amount made available 
     under this section and the eligible activities to be 
     undertaken with that amount;
       ``(C) reasonable access to records regarding the use of any 
     amounts received by the eligible unit of general local 
     government, Native American groups or eligible Indian tribe 
     under this section in any preceding fiscal year; and

[[Page S3271]]

       ``(D) reasonable notice of, and opportunity to comment on, 
     any substantial change proposed to be made in the use of 
     amounts received under this section from 1 eligible activity 
     to another.
       ``(e) Distribution of Grants.--
       ``(1) In general.--In each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
     distribute to each eligible unit of general local government, 
     Native American groups and eligible Indian tribe that meets 
     the requirements of subsection (d)(1) a grant in an amount 
     described in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Amount.--Of the total amount made available to carry 
     out this section in each fiscal year, the Secretary shall 
     distribute to each grantee the amount equal to the greater 
     of--
       ``(A) the pro rata share of the grantee, as determined by 
     the Secretary, based on the combined annual population 
     outmigration level (as determined by Secretary of 
     Agriculture) and the per capita income for the rural recovery 
     area served by the grantee; or
       ``(B) $200,000.
       ``(f) Eligible Activities.--Each grantee shall use amounts 
     received under this section for 1 or more of the following 
     eligible activities, which may be undertaken either directly 
     by the grantee, or by any local economic development 
     corporation, regional planning district, non-profit community 
     development corporation, or statewide development 
     organization authorized by the grantee:
       ``(1) The acquisition, construction, repair, 
     reconstruction, operation, maintenance, or installation of 
     facilities for water and wastewater service or any other 
     infrastructure needs determined to be critical to the further 
     development or improvement of a designated industrial park.
       ``(2) The acquisition or disposition of real property 
     (including air rights, water rights, and other interests 
     therein) for rural community development activities.
       ``(3) The development of telecommunications infrastructure 
     within a designated industrial park that encourages high 
     technology business development in rural areas
       ``(4) Activities necessary to develop and implement a 
     comprehensive rural development plan, including payment of 
     reasonable administrative costs related to planning and 
     execution of rural development activities.
       ``(5) Affordable housing initiatives.
       ``(g) Performance and Evaluation Report.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each grantee shall annually submit to 
     the Secretary a performance and evaluation report, concerning 
     the use of amounts received under this section.
       ``(2) Contents.--Each report submitted under paragraph (1) 
     shall include a description of--
       ``(i) publish a proposed statement of rural development 
     objectives and a description of the proposed eligible 
     activities described in subsection (f) for which the grant 
     will be used; and
       ``(A) the eligible activities carried out by the grantee 
     with amounts received under this section, and the degree to 
     which the grantee has achieved the rural development 
     objectives included in the final statement submitted under 
     subsection (d)(1);
       ``(B) the nature of and reasons for any change in the rural 
     development objectives or the eligible activities of the 
     grantee after submission of the final statement under 
     subsection (d)(1); and
       ``(C) any manner in which the grantee would change the 
     rural development objectives of the grantee as a result of 
     the experience of the grantee in administering amounts 
     received under this section.
       ``(h) Retention of Income.--A grantee may retain any income 
     that is realized from the grant, if--
       ``(1) the income was realized after the initial 
     disbursement of amounts to the grantee under this section; 
     and
       ``(2) the--
       ``(A) grantee agrees to utilize the income for 1 or more 
     eligible activities; or
       ``(B) amount of the income is determined by the Secretary 
     to be so small that compliance with subparagraph (A) would 
     create an unreasonable administrative burden on the grantee.
       ``(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $50,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2000 through 2006''.
                                  ____

  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
help address the economic malaise that has gripped certain rural and 
remote areas of our country and the problems arising from the high cost 
of developing and maintaining infrastructure in remote communities. The 
legislation will provide grants to rural communities suffering from 
out-migration and low per-capita income and will help ensure that 
remote communities are not unfairly penalized by the high cost of 
services, such as water, waste water, fuel and utility services. I want 
to thank my colleague from Alaska, Senator Murkowski, for his work on 
this legislation. His contribution in addressing these problems is most 
welcome.
  Rural areas of our Nation continue to experience vast fluctuations in 
their economic well-being due to their dependence on worldwide 
agricultural markets. The link between global economic forces and local 
economic conditions is nowhere as pronounced as it is in rural America. 
And yet, rural communities are often those least capable of weathering 
the severe periodic downturns that occur in global markets.
  Statistics bear out these fluctuations in economic activity, but they 
fail to fully capture the human suffering that lies just beyond the 
numbers. Economic downturns lead to the migration away from farm-
dependent, rural communities, further stifling economic opportunities 
for those left behind. The 1990 Census highlighted these migratory 
trends, and I anticipate that similar trends will be captured by the 
upcoming Census, as well.
  In short, the bandwagon of prosperity that has carried many Americans 
along through the past decade has left many rural areas standing by the 
wayside. If this trend continues, more and more young people will be 
forced to leave the towns they grew up in for opportunities in urban 
areas. In towns like Webster, Sisseton, and White River, South Dakota, 
we are seeing farm families broken up, populations decline, and main 
street businesses close their doors. While there is no doubt that 
economic growth in our urban areas has benefited our Nation, the 
disparity of economic development between our rural and urban areas 
cannot be ignored. If nothing is done to address the economic 
challenges facing these areas, we will jeopardize the future of rural 
America.
  That is why Senator Murkowski and I are introducing legislation to 
provide the Nation's rural areas with the resources necessary to make 
critical investments in their future and, by doing so, to create 
economic opportunities that will help them sustain a valuable and 
important way of life. While Federal agencies, such as the United 
States Department of Agriculture's Office of Rural Development and the 
Economic Development Administration, provide assistance for rural 
development purposes, there are no Federal programs that provide a 
steady source of funding for rural areas most affected by severe out-
migration and low per-capita income. For these areas, the process of 
economic development is often most arduous. The Rural and Remote 
Community Fairness Act of 1999 will provide the basic, long-term 
assistance necessary to aid the coordinated efforts of local community 
leaders as they begin economic recovery efforts to ensure a bright 
future for rural America.
  Specifically, the Rural and Remote Community Fairness Act of 1999 
will provide a minimum of $200,000 per year to counties and Indian 
tribes with (1) out-migration levels of one percent or more over a 
five-year period, (2) per-capita income levels that are below the 
national average, and (3) borders that are not adjacent to a 
metropolitan area. This legislation authorizes the United States 
Department of Housing and Urban Development to set aside $50 million in 
Community Development Block Grant funding for this purpose. The money, 
which is already included in the agency's budget, will be allocated on 
a formula basis to rural counties and Indian tribes suffering from out-
migration and low-per capita income levels.
  County and tribal governments will be able to use this federal 
funding to improve their industrial parks, purchase land for 
development, build affordable housing and create economic recovery 
strategies according to their needs. All of these important steps will 
help rural communities address their economic problems and plan for 
long-term growth and development.
  In addition to addressing the problems of out-migration from low per-
capita income areas, this legislation also focuses on the unique 
problems associated with those communities located in areas with high 
energy costs. Specifically, the legislation sets aside $100,000,000 for 
weatherization efforts, the construction of cost-efficient power 
facilities and fuel storage facilities, energy management programs, 
water and waste water facilities, the acquisition or disposition of 
real property for rural and remote development activities, and for the 
implementation of a comprehensive rural and remote development plan.
  Mr. President, the Rural and Remote Community Fairness Act of 1999 
holds great potential for revitalizing many of

[[Page S3272]]

our nation's most neglected and vulnerable areas. I urge my colleagues 
to support its enactment this Congress.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LOTT (for himself, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Breaux, Mr. 
        Hutchinson, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Craig, and Mr. Murkowski):
  S. 710. A bill to authorize the feasibility study on the preservation 
of certain Civil War battlefields along the Vicksburg Campaign Trail; 
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.


     vicksburg campaign trail battlefields preservation act of 1999

  Mr. LOTT. Mr, President, on February 20, 1899, the 56th Congress took 
an important step toward preserving one of our nation's most 
significant historical resources when it established the Vicksburg 
National Military Park. The campaign and siege at Vicksburg, the 
``Gibraltar of the Confederacy,'' was a pivotal moment in American 
History. As the gateway to the Mississippi River, the region was of 
vital strategic importance to both the South and the North. For this 
reason, the Vicksburg engagement is heralded as one of the most 
brilliant offensive campaigns ever fought on U.S. soil.
  Every year, the Vicksburg National Military Park plays host to over 
one million visitors who are able to take advantage of this national 
historic treasure. Like many other National Parks, Vicksburg 
contributes to the cultural, recreational, scenic, and economic 
vitality of the region.
  As America celebrates the centennial anniversary of the Park's 
founding, it is important to recognize that a number of other campaign 
related sites throughout Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, and 
Tennessee, used by both the Union and Confederate Armies during the 
1862 to 1863 Vicksburg conflict, are in desperate need of study, 
interpretation, management, and protection.
  These are sites that have been listed as historically significant 
properties on both state and national registries. Unfortunately, many 
of these same sites, buildings, fortifications, earthworks, and other 
landmarks along the Vicksburg Campaign Trail route have been identified 
by the National Trust for Historic Preservation as being among the 11 
most endangered historic places in America. The Mississippi Heritage 
Trust, based in Jackson, also named the Campaign Trail as one of its 
highest priorities and placed the Vicksburg Trail on its list of most 
threatened historic areas in the state.
  Mr. President, that is why I am introducing legislation today to 
authorize the Park Service to conduct a feasibility study on the 
Vicksburg Campaign Trail. A study that will identify options for 
preserving some of our nation's most important Civil War battlefields 
and sites.
  At the outbreak of the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln 
gathered his ranking civil and military leaders to develop a strategy 
for ending the war. While seated around a large table examining a map 
of the nation, Lincoln made a wide sweeping gesture with his hand, and 
then placed his finger on the map at Vicksburg. He said, ``See what a 
lot of land these fellows hold of which Vicksburg is the key. The war 
can never be brought to a close until that key is in our pocket.''
  It was a crucial for the Federal government to regain control of the 
lower Mississippi River. The goal was to enable troops, supplies and 
commerce to flow unhindered from the Northwest. Taking the Gibraltar of 
the Confederacy would sever vital Southern supply routes, achieve a 
major objective of the Anaconda Plan, and effectively seal the doom of 
the Confederate capital in Richmond.
  Even with Major General Ulysses S. Grant leading the charge, 
Vicksburg would prove a tough nut to crack. Its powerful Southern 
batteries were trained on the river and an 8 mile-long swath of 
earthworks guarded all land based approaches. The reinforced line 
consisted of nine major forts connected by trenches and rifle pits 
manned by a garrison of 30,000 troops and 172 mounted guns. These 
fortifications posed the greatest challenge to Union domination of the 
Mississippi River.
  The campaign to capture Vicksburg, to ``pocket the key'' to Union 
victory, lasted 18 months and involved more than 100,000 soldiers. It 
was here that entire regiments of black soldiers wore the uniform of 
the United States Army for only the second time in American history. 
The battle of Vicksburg also involved a number of historic naval 
engagements between Union gunboats and Confederate warships.
  After months of frustration and failure to capture the Confederate 
bastion, General Grant marched his force of over 45,000 men down the 
west side of the Mississippi River. With the assistance of the U.S. 
fleet, Union troops crossed the river below Vicksburg and swiftly moved 
deep into Mississippi. After five fierce battles, the state capital of 
Jackson was taken. The Union Army then turned west and marched along 
the rail line towards Vicksburg. Lt. Gen. John C. Pemberton led the 
defense of Vicksburg and held the Rebel line for some time. Pemberton 
refused to succumb to unconditional surrender even after 47 days of 
siege. He finally relinquished the city on July 4, 1863 after securing 
paroles for his resistance forces.
  Mr. President, many historians consider the battle of Vicksburg to be 
the most decisive campaign of the Civil War. It was also the most 
complex combined operation ever undertaken by American armed forces 
prior to World War II. In fact, the Vicksburg Campaign is required 
study at the United States Military Academy, the Army War College, and 
the Commanding General Staff College. These are the men and women who 
will eventually lead our armed forces. Rather than just read about the 
conflict in textbooks, troops from military units throughout the 
country ride the battlefields to experience first hand the tactics of 
war.
  At a time when the movie ``Saving Private Ryan'' is recognized for 
its true-to-life depiction of the battlefield on Omaha Beach, Normandy, 
France, our nation must continue to reflect on the hardships suffered 
here on our own soil. Those suffered by soldiers and civilians 
throughout the North and South.
  The Vicksburg campaign is truly an example of the pathos of war here 
on America's shores. Brother fought against brother on opposite sides 
of the battle lines. In defense of ideals each held dear. During the 
siege, soldiers fed off the land while the civilian population lived 
underground to escape the constant bombardment of Union guns--enduring 
exposure, sickness, and little food. It was a military operation where 
tens of thousands of lives were lost.
  Vicksburg is also an illustration of the healing and reunification 
that followed Reconstruction. Union and Confederate veterans joined 
forces to establish Vicksburg National Military Park. We owe these 
former combatants a debt of gratitude for their efforts. Not only for 
their distinguished bravery during the most trying of times, but also 
for the vital legacy they left us all.
  Now it is our solemn duty to safeguard the memory of those who fought 
so dearly during the many battles that occurred to secure Vicksburg by 
studying the entire campaign trail. For its contribution to our 
understanding of the Civil War and for its continued influence on 
American history. This great contest encompassed a vast geographical 
region. Battle related sites are scattered throughout Mississippi, 
Louisiana, Arkansas, and Tennessee. While some landmarks have been lost 
to age and neglect, it is not to late to protect the hundreds of 
remnants associated with the campaign that remain to tell the story.
  Mr. President, the non-partisan measure offered today is also a key. 
The key to protecting our national heritage. This bill will begin a 
much needed process to protect the integrity of the many historic 
venues associated with the battle of Vicksburg that still exist. 
Literally hundreds of miles of roads, fields, and bayous were covered 
by Yankee and Rebel troops during this engagement. To truly understand 
and appreciate this historic conflict, it is important to look beyond 
the confines of the Vicksburg National Military Park as it exists 
today. The 106th Congress needs to build upon the legacy our 
forefathers left us by developing a comprehensive plan leading to the 
eventual preservation of the many endangered sites along the four state 
campaign trail. This Congress needs to authorize this much needed 
study--the second key. President Lincoln got the first key over one 
hundred years ago.

[[Page S3273]]

 Now that 136 years have past, the current President needs the second 
key.
  Without Congressional action, historians, soldiers, re-enactors, and 
tourists will forever lose direct access to the many at-risk landmarks 
and battlefields along the Vicksburg campaign route that have not yet 
disappeared. Sites, that while inexorably linked by time and honor, 
will simply vanish into the wind without the development of coordinated 
and comprehensive preservation strategies. Sites where the true 
experience of history will only be left to words.
  Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join with me in support of this 
non-partisan measure. Let us take this first and necessary step to 
protect our national heritage for those who have gone before us and for 
those yet to come.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 710

       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 ``Vicksburg Campaign Trail 
     Battlefields Preservation Act of 1999''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) there are situated along the Vicksburg Campaign Trail 
     in the States of Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, and 
     Tennessee the sites of several key Civil War battles;
       (2) the battlefields along the Vicksburg Campaign Trail are 
     collectively of national significance in the history of the 
     Civil War; and
       (3) the preservation of those battlefields would vitally 
     contribute to the understanding of the heritage of the United 
     States.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to authorize a 
     feasibility study to determine what measures should be taken 
     to preserve certain Civil War battlefields along the 
     Vicksburg Campaign Trail.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Campaign trail state.--The term ``Campaign Trail 
     State'' means each of the States of Mississippi, Louisiana, 
     Arkansas, and Tennessee, including political subdivisions of 
     those States.
       (2) Civil war battlefield.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``Civil War battlefield'' means 
     the land and interests in land that is the site of a Civil 
     War battlefield, including structures on or adjacent to the 
     land, as generally depicted on the Map.
       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``Civil War battlefield'' 
     includes--
       (i) the battlefields at Helena and Arkansas Post, Arkansas;
       (ii) Goodrich's Landing near Transylvania, and sites in and 
     around Lake Providence, East Carroll Parish, Louisiana;
       (iii) the battlefield at Milliken's Bend, Madison Parish, 
     Louisiana;
       (iv) the route of Grant's march through Louisiana from 
     Milliken's Bend to Hard Times, Madison and Tensas Parishes, 
     Louisiana;
       (v) the Winter Quarters at Tensas Parish, Louisiana;
       (vi) Grant's landing site at Bruinsburg, and the route of 
     Grant's march from Bruinsburg to Vicksburg, Claiborne, Hinds, 
     and Warren Counties, Mississippi;
       (vii) the battlefield at Port Gibson (including Shaifer 
     House, Bethel Church, and the ruins of Windsor), Claiborne 
     County, Mississippi;
       (viii) the battlefield at Grand Gulf, Claiborne County, 
     Mississippi;
       (ix) the battlefield at Raymond (including Waverly, (the 
     Peyton House)), Hinds County, Mississippi;
       (x) the battlefield at Jackson, Hinds County, Mississippi;
       (xi) the Union siege lines around Jackson, Hinds County, 
     Mississippi;
       (xii) the battlefield at Champion Hill (including Coker 
     House), Hinds County, Mississippi;
       (xiii) the battlefield at Big Black River Bridge, Hinds and 
     Warren Counties, Mississippi;
       (xiv) the Union fortifications at Haynes Bluff, Confederate 
     fortifications at Snyder's Bluff, and remnants of Federal 
     exterior lines, Warren County, Mississippi;
       (xv) the battlefield at Chickasaw Bayou, Warren County, 
     Mississippi;
       (xvi) Pemberton's Headquarters at Warren County, 
     Mississippi;
       (xvii) the site of actions taken in the Mississippi Delta 
     and Confederate fortifications near Grenada, Grenada County, 
     Mississippi;
       (xviii) the site of the start of Greirson's Raid and other 
     related sites, LaGrange, Tennessee; and
       (xix) any other sites considered appropriate by the 
     Secretary.
       (3) Map.--The term ``Map'' means the map entitled 
     ``Vicksburg Campaign Trail National Battlefields'', numbered 
     ______, and dated ______.
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National 
     Park Service.

     SEC. 4. FEASIBILITY STUDY.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall complete a 
     feasibility study to determine what measures should be taken 
     to preserve Civil War battlefields along the Vicksburg 
     Campaign Trail.
       (b) Components.--In completing the study, the Secretary 
     shall--
       (1) enter into contracts with entities to use advanced 
     technology such as remote sensing, river modeling, and flow 
     analysis to determine which property included in the Civil 
     War battlefields should be preserved, restored, managed, 
     maintained, or acquired due to the national historical 
     significance of the property;
       (2) evaluate options for the establishment of a management 
     entity for the Civil War battlefields consisting of a unit of 
     government or a private nonprofit organization that--
       (A) administers and manages the Civil War battlefields; and
       (B) possesses the legal authority to--
       (i) receive Federal funds and funds from other units of 
     government or other organizations for use in managing the 
     Civil War battlefields;
       (ii) disburse Federal funds to other units of government or 
     other nonprofit organizations for use in managing the Civil 
     War battlefields;
       (iii) enter into agreements with the Federal government, 
     State governments, or other units of government and nonprofit 
     organizations; and
       (iv) acquire land or interests in land by gift or devise, 
     by purchase from a willing seller using donated or 
     appropriated funds, or by donation;
       (3) make recommendations to the Campaign Trail States for 
     the management, preservation, and interpretation of the 
     natural, cultural, and historical resources of the Civil War 
     battlefields;
       (4) identify appropriate partnerships among Federal, State, 
     and local governments, regional entities, and the private 
     sector, including nonprofit organizations and the 
     organization known as ``Friends of the Vicksburg Campaign and 
     Historic Trail'', in furtherance of the purposes of this Act; 
     and
       (5) recommend methods of ensuring continued local 
     involvement and participation in the management, protection, 
     and development of the Civil War battlefields.
       (c) Report.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     completion of the study under this section, the Secretary 
     shall submit a report describing the findings of the study 
     to--
       (1) the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 
     Senate; and
       (2) the Committee on Resources of the House of 
     Representatives.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this Act $1,500,000.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 711. A bill to allow for the investment of joint Federal and State 
funds from the civil settlement of damages from the Exxon Valdez oil 
spill, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.


    civil settlement of damages from the ``exxon valdez'' oil spill

 Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, we are ten years older, but are 
we ten years wiser since the Exxon Valdez oil spill?
  With the anniversary of the Nation's worst oil spill occurring today, 
the question most asked by national media is how the environment and 
wildlife of Alaska has fared. In fact, just last week on a ``60 
minutes'' story this exact question was asked. It was asked not only by 
the network doing the story, but by the Alaskans being interviewed.
  What's particularly frustrating is that in many cases it is still not 
possible to give informed answers.
  In the years since 11.3 million gallons of crude oil bubbled into the 
sea, the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) Trustees Council has had nearly 
$800 million of the eventual $900 million that Exxon will pay at their 
disposal to fund scientific studies. Those studies should have 
determined the health of marine life, wildlife and the ecosystem of 
Prince William Sound. But according to the latest summary of scientific 
studies, while it is possible to say that some species have or are 
recovering, it is not possible to give a full accounting.
  According to a report from the council last month very little is 
known about the health of cutthroat trout, Dolly Varden, rockfish or 
Kittlitz's murrelets. And there is only slightly more information on 
the health of killer whales, pigeon guillemots, cormorants, and common 
loon, harbor seals and harlequin ducks.
  While it is heartening that the Sound appears to be recovering sooner 
than many thought likely, and that herring and salmon stocks are 
recovering as

[[Page S3274]]

are bald eagles and river otters, it is frustrating that more hard 
scientific data has not been gathered.
  That is why, Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation, on 
behalf of myself and Senator Stevens, that will provide for more 
science to be done on the impacted spill area. The legislation I am 
introducing will allow for a higher rate of interest to be earned 
through outside investments of the settlement funds from the Exxon 
Valdez oil spill.
  The legislation specifies that the interest on investments received 
under this new authority must be used to support marine research and 
economic restoration projects for the fishing industry and local 
fishermen. If the trustees choose to use this authority, an additional 
$20 million to $30 million could be generated for research and 
restoration between now and 2001.
  The legislation further requires the trustees to present a report to 
Congress recommending a structure the trustees believe would be most 
effective and appropriate for the administration and expenditure of 
remaining funds and interest received. This provision is also 
consistent with comments from the public suggesting that an independent 
science-oriented board should control the process of funding science 
projects, rather than trustees who represent agencies that may be 
seeking project funding.
  I, for one, believe the Council's priorities have been misplaced 
which has necessitated this legislation. They have been unwilling to 
admit that science does not yet provide many mitigation answers; 
instead, the spill trustees have decided to go on a land buying spree 
as an alternative.
  This is a mistake, Mr. President.
  In a State where 68 percent of all land is federally owned and where 
individuals own less than 1 percent of all property, the trustees have 
allocated $416 million of the initial $900 million court settlement 
just for land acquisitions. They have nearly completed the purchase of 
647,000 acres in and around Prince William Sound and just recently 
voted to set aside an additional $55 million to fund acquisitions, 
literally, forever even though most of the land being bought was not 
directly affected by the spill.
  Alaska Natives worked for decades to win the 1971 land settlement 
that gave them control of 44 million acres of Alaska. Now, in less than 
a quarter of a century, Natives have lost much of the land they had 
fought to gain--a good part of the Native lands in the region have been 
reacquired through the actions of the trustees. It is ironic, indeed, 
that the United States purchased Alaska for $7.2 million in 1867 and 
that 60 times more money already has been committed to buy back parts 
of it.
  Back in 1994 when $600 million of the settlement was still 
uncommitted, I urged the trustees to commit the bulk of the settlement 
to a ``permanent fund'' that would provide a perpetual source of 
significant funding for research or mitigation projects. I also urged 
the trustees to utilize the expertise of the University of Alaska in 
undertaking those studies. I warned that if too much funding was 
allocated to land acquisition, or spent on marginal science, less money 
would be available to fund sound studies to shed light on the mysteries 
affecting commercial and sport fisheries and marine life and wildlife 
in the Sound.
  In the intervening years we have seen General Accounting Office 
audits documenting that the trustees have pad on average 56 percent 
above government-appraised value for the lands it has acquired. We've 
seen a situation this year where the trustees paid nearly $80 million 
for lands on Kodiak Island, while the Department of the Interior set 
the value of those same lands at about one-third that amount when it 
came to funding revenue sharing payments to the Kodiak Island Borough.
  While the trustees recently voted to place about $115 million of the 
settlement aside to provide interest to fund future scientific studies, 
I believe the earnings from all of the roughly $170 million still owed 
by Exxon should be devoted to pay for marine research and monitoring 
including applied fisheries research. I believe this approach will give 
us answers, not leave us guessing, about what is happening to the Sound 
and what we can do to improve the habitat of the region. The 
legislation we introduce today will begin to address this need.
  Long after the Sound has healed its wounds, those lands bought by the 
trustees will be lost forever to economic activity and to the Native 
heritage. Nowhere could this be clearer than the example of one Native 
corporation that agreed to sell its lands with the intent to invest in 
a perpetual trust to help children go to school and provide solutions 
to other problems. Instead it was pressured to make a one time payment 
to each shareholder.
  The longest-lasting legacy of the tragedy may be that some of the 
Natives find themselves like the Biblical Esau who sold his birthright 
to Jacob for a mess of pottage and bread. When the meal was gone so was 
his heritage. When that one-time payment has been spent, what will have 
been gained and what will pass on to their children?
  Today, another tragedy is clear, we still do not have the answers to 
the effects of the spill, even though we had the wherewithal to have 
obtained them.
  Mr. President, immediately following the spill, I sponsored a 
provision in the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, which was passed by 
Congress, to create Regional Citizens Advisory Councils, giving local 
residents the authority and the resources to improve all aspects of oil 
transport planning and cleanup. Patterned after a concept then in place 
at the Port of Sullom Voe in the North Sea's Shetland Islands, there is 
no question that the oversight and creativity that the councils 
engendered have done the most to make Alaska's oil transportation 
system the best in the world.
  It is time for Congress to act again today, to ensure that we have 
the resources to obtain the best science available in understanding 
Prince William Sound. I believe this bill will allow us to do just 
that.
 Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I join Senator Murkowski in 
introducing this bill to allow greater interest to be earned on funds 
from the civil settlement between Exxon and the State of Alaska and the 
Federal Government resulting from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. This 
is another silver lining from the spill.
  Under the civil settlement, Exxon has paid $900 million to the State 
of Alaska and Federal Government. The settlement established the Exxon 
Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council to administer these funds. The Trustee 
Council is comprised of three Federal and three State representatives.
  While I disagree with the Council's decisions to spend much of the 
funds to acquire land in Alaska, I was pleased by their decision on 
March 1, 1999 to dedicate $115 million for an endowment for marine 
research, monitoring, and restoration.
  Our bill would allow the Council to invest these funds outside the 
court registry, where it would earn greater interest than under the 
court's authority. The bill is similar to the legislation we pursued 
during the 105th Congress. We are encouraged that the Trustee Council 
has directed its Executive Director to work with us on this measure, 
and we will keep an open mind when those discussions begin.
  I also intend to explore whether we can merge the EVOS research 
endowment with the North Pacific Marine Research endowment I created 
last year with funds received by the Federal Government in the case 
involving Dinkum Sands oil lease revenue. The EVOS funds can only be 
used in the spill area, while the Dinkum Sands funds can be used for 
research relating to any of the marine waters off Alaska. Merging the 
two would maximize research benefits for Alaska and the Nation, and 
minimize potential duplication.
  In 1997, we established the 19-member North Pacific Research Board to 
prepare the marine research plan for the Dinkum Sands funds. In 1998, 
however, during the first year of funding, we simplified the approach 
so that the University of Alaska has the responsibility for preparing 
the plan, and the plan must then be approved by the State of Alaska, 
the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Commerce. Our 
goal is to update the North Pacific Research Board so that the 
University will have the central role, but the other entities on the 
North Pacific Marine Research Board will also have an advisory role in 
the long term in setting the research priorities.
  During our work on this, we will also see whether it is possible to 
merge the

[[Page S3275]]

EVOS research endowment with the Dinkum Sands endowment. The bill that 
Senator Murkowski and I are introducing is the critical piece of the 
puzzle that will allow greater interest to be earned on the EVOS marine 
research endowment whether or not we are ultimately able to merge the 
two.
                                 ______
                                 
  By Mr. LOTT (for himself, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Breaux, and Mr. Wyden):
  S. 712. A bill to amend title 39, United States Code, to allow postal 
patrons to contribute to funding for highway-rail grade crossing safety 
through the voluntary purchase of certain specially issued United 
States postage stamps; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.


                THE ``LOOK, LISTEN, AND LIVE STAMP ACT''

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, today I, along with Senators Hutchison, 
Breaux, and Wyden, introduce the ``Look, Listen, and Live Stamp Act.'' 
This bill would authorize the U.S. Postal Service to establish a 
special-rate postage stamp to promote highway-rail grade crossing 
safety.
  There are approximately 150,000 public crossings in America today, 
the majority of which are equipped with only passive warning devices. 
In 1998, there were 3,446 grade-crossing collisions involving motor 
vehicles resulting in 1,950 serious injuries and 422 deaths. A motorist 
is 40 times more likely to die in a crash involving a train than in a 
collision involving another motor vehicle. Most recently, this nation 
witnessed the horror of the Amtrak grade-crossing collision in 
Bourbonnais, Illinois last week.
  Sadly, Mr. President, grade-crossing deaths are preventable. 
Unfortunately, the cost of separating or eliminating all of these 
crossings would run into the trillions of dollars, and even the cost of 
equipping every crossing with the most effective active warning devices 
would run into the billions of dollars. While the railroad industry and 
Federal, state, and local governments are slowly reducing the number of 
grade-crossings and improving others, the process will take decades to 
complete. Also, about half of all collisions at highway-rail grade 
crossings occur at crossings equipped with active warning systems in 
place: flashing lights, bells and gates.
  To save lives now, we must intensify our efforts to educate our 
citizens on the hazards of, and proper method for, crossing a railroad 
track. The ``Look, Listen, and Live Stamp Act'' would promote this 
worthy cause in two ways. First, the stamp itself, and its display in 
post offices throughout America, would serve as a reminder to all to 
treat the crossing of a railroad track as a life or death situation. 
Second, it would provide an additional source of revenue to the 
Department of Transportation to fund Operation Lifesaver programs. 
Operation Lifesaver is non-profit, nationwide public education program 
dedicated to reducing collisions, injuries, and fatalities at 
intersections where America's roadways meet railways and along railroad 
rights-of-way. ``Look, Listen, and Live'' is an Operation Lifesaver 
slogan intended to remind motor vehicle drivers how to protect their 
lives when they approach a highway-rail grade crossing.
  Mr. President, the bill would authorize the U.S. Postal Service to 
sell the stamp at up to 25 percent more than the cost of a first-class 
stamp, with the difference going to the Department of Transportation to 
provide additional Operation Lifesaver funding. U.S. Postal Service 
customers could choose to buy these special stamps, and thereby 
contribute to this worthy cause, or continue to purchase regular first-
class stamps at the going rate. The choice would be theirs. Most 
importantly, the stamp will provide a constant reminder of the need to 
exercise caution in crossing railroad tracks. Public memory of the 
Bourbonnais, Illinois incident, and similar fatal collisions, will fade 
as media interest shifts to new topics. Operation Lifesaver's public 
awareness programs are an effort to change driver behavior, but 
additional reminders, such as this stamp, are required.
  The lives lost by a driver's careless crossing of a railroad track 
are usually those in the motor vehicle, but many times include the 
passengers and crew members of the train. Even when the train crew 
survives, they are haunted by the memories of helplessly watching these 
needless deaths. This is a nationwide problem, but a March 22, 1999, 
USA Today article detailed the dangers of this problem in my home state 
of Mississippi. I want to dedicate this bill to the families of the 
victims of the Amtrak ``City of New Orleans'' collision in Bourbonnais 
last week, especially to the families of the five victims from 
Mississippi: June Bonnin and Jessica Tickle of Nesbit, Mississippi, 
Lacey Lipscomb and Rainey Lipscomb of Lake Cormorant, Mississippi, and 
Sheena Dowe of Jackson, Mississippi.
  Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this 
bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 712

       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 ``Look, Listen, and Live Stamp 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. SPECIAL POSTAGE STAMPS TO BENEFIT HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE 
                   CROSSING SAFETY.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 4 of title 39, United States Code, 
     is amended by inserting after section 414 the following:

     ``Sec. 414a. Special postage stamps for highway-rail grade 
       crossing safety

       ``(a) In order to afford the public a convenient way to 
     contribute to funding for highway-rail grade crossing safety, 
     the Postal Service shall establish a special rate of postage 
     for first-class mail under this section.
       ``(b) The rate of postage established under this section--
       ``(1) shall be equal to the regular first-class rate of 
     postage, plus a differential of not to exceed 25 percent;
       ``(2) shall be set by the Governors in accordance with such 
     procedures as the Governors shall by regulation prescribe (in 
     lieu of the procedures under chapter 36); and
       ``(3) shall be offered as an alternative to the regular 
     first-class rate of postage.
       ``(c) The use of the special rate of postage established 
     under this section shall be voluntary on the part of postal 
     patrons.
       ``(d)(1) Amounts becoming available for highway-rail grade 
     crossing safety under this section shall be paid by the 
     Postal Service to the Department of Transportation for 
     Operation Lifesaver. Payments under this section shall be 
     made under such arrangements as the Postal Service shall by 
     mutual agreement with the Department of Transportation 
     establish in order to carry out the purposes of this section, 
     except that, under those arrangements, payments to the 
     Department of Transportation shall be made at least twice a 
     year.
       ``(2) For purposes of this section, the term `amounts 
     becoming available for highway-rail grade crossing safety 
     under this section' means--
       ``(A) the total amounts received by the Postal Service that 
     the Postal Service would not have received but for the 
     enactment of this section, reduced by
       ``(B) an amount sufficient to cover reasonable costs 
     incurred by the Postal Service in carrying out this section, 
     including those attributable to the printing, sale, and 
     distribution of stamps under this section,

     as determined by the Postal Service under regulations that it 
     shall prescribe.
       ``(e) It is the sense of Congress that nothing in this 
     section should--
       ``(1) directly or indirectly cause a net decrease in total 
     funds received by the Department of Transportation for 
     Operation Lifesaver below the level that would otherwise have 
     been received but for the enactment of this section; or
       ``(2) affect regular first-class rates of postage or any 
     other regular rates of postage.
       ``(f) Special postage stamps under this section shall be 
     made available to the public beginning on such date as the 
     Postal Service shall by regulation prescribe, but in no event 
     later than 12 months after the date of the enactment of this 
     section.
       ``(g) The Postmaster General shall include in each report 
     rendered under section 2402 with respect to any period during 
     any portion of which this section is in effect information, 
     concerning the operation of this section, except that, at a 
     minimum, each report shall include--
       ``(1) the total amount described in subsection (d)(2)(A) 
     which was received by the Postal Service during the period 
     covered by such report; and
       ``(2) of the amount under paragraph (1), how much (in the 
     aggregate and by category) was required for the purposes 
     described in subsection (d)(2)(B).
       ``(h) This section shall cease to be effective at the end 
     of the 2-year period beginning on the date on which special 
     postage stamps under this section are first made available to 
     the public.''.
       (b) Report by the Comptroller General of the United 
     States.--Not later than 3 months (but not earlier than 6 
     months) before the end of the 2-year period referred to in 
     section 414a(h) of title 39, United States Code (as amended 
     by subsection (a)), the Comptroller General of the United 
     States shall submit to Congress a report on the operation of 
     such section. Such report shall include--

[[Page S3276]]

       (1) an evaluation of the effectiveness and the 
     appropriateness of the authority provided by such section as 
     a means of fundraising; and
       (2) a description of the monetary and other resources 
     required of the Postal Service in carrying out such section.
       (c) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) Table of sections.--The table of sections for chapter 4 
     of title 39, United States Code, is amended by striking the 
     item relating to section 414 and inserting the following:

``414. Special postage stamps for breast cancer research.
``414a. Special postage stamps for highway-rail grade crossing 
              safety.''.

       (2) Section heading.--The heading for section 414 of title 
     39, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

     ``Sec. 414. Special postage stamps for breast cancer 
       research.''.

                          ____________________