[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 75 (Thursday, June 15, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5241-S5272]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. GRAMM:
S. 2732. A bill to ensure that all States participating in the
National Boll Weevil Eradication Program are treated equitably; to the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
the boll weevil eradication equity act
Mr. GRAMM. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Boll
Weevil Eradication Equity Act. Boll weevil infestation has caused more
than $15 billion worth of damage to the United States cotton crop, and
the nation's cotton producers lose $300 million annually. Texas is the
largest cotton producing state in the nation, yet the scope of this
problem extends beyond Texas. The ability of all states to eradicate
this pest would stop future migration to boll weevil-free areas and
prevent reintroduction of the boll weevil into those areas which have
already completed a successful eradication effort.
We must continue to build upon the past success of the existing
program that authorizes the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
of the United States Department of Agriculture to join with individual
states and provide technical assistance and federal cost-share funds.
This highly successful partnership has resulted in complete boll weevil
eradication in California, Florida, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, Virginia
and North Carolina. These states received an average federal cost-share
of 26.9 percent, with producers and individual states paying the
remaining cost.
Since 1994, however, the program has expanded into Texas,
Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Oklahoma and New Mexico,
but the federal appropriation has remained relatively constant. The
addition of this vast acreage has resulted in dramatically reducing the
federal cost share to only 4 percent, leaving producers and individual
states to fund the remaining 96 percent. This is not fair to the states
now participating in the program because federal matching funds to the
states enrolled in the early years of the program constituted almost 30
percent of eradication costs.
The National Cotton Council estimates that for every $1 spent on
eradication, cotton farmers will accrue about $12 in benefits. The bill
I am introducing today will authorize a federal cost share contribution
of not less than 26.9 percent to the states and producers which still
must contend with boll weevil infestation. I urge my colleagues to join
this effort to ensure that these producers receive no less support than
that which was provided during the earlier stages of the program.
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. 2732
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 ``Boll Weevil Eradication
Equity Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) as of the date of enactment of this Act, infestation by
Anthonomus grandis (commonly known as the ``boll weevil'')
has caused more than $15,000,000,000 in damage to cotton
crops of the United States and costs cotton producers in the
United States approximately $300,000,000 annually;
(2) through the National Boll Weevil Eradication Program
(referred to in this Act as the ``program''), the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service of the Department of
Agriculture partners with producers to provide technical
assistance and Federal cost share funds to States in an
effort to eradicate the boll weevil;
(3) States that enrolled in the program before 1994 have
since been able to complete boll weevil eradication and were
provided a Federal cost share that accounted for an average
of 26.9 percent of the total cost of eradication;
(4) States that enrolled in the program in or after 1994
account for 65 percent of the national cotton acreage and are
now provided an average Federal cost share of only 4 percent,
placing a tremendous financial burden on the individual
producers;
(5) the addition of vast acreage into the program has
resulted in an increased need for Federal cost share funds;
(6) a producer that participates in the program today
deserves not less than the same level of commitment that was
provided to producers that enrolled in the program before
1994; and
(7) the ability of all States to eradicate the boll weevil
would prevent further migration of the boll weevil to boll
weevil-free areas and reintroduction of the boll weevil in
those areas having completed boll weevil eradication.
SEC. 3. BOLL WEEVIL ERADICATION ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, the Secretary of Agriculture shall provide funds to pay
at least 26.9 percent of the total program costs incurred by
producers participating in the program.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this Act such sums as are
necessary for fiscal years 2001 through 2004.
______
By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. Sarbanes):
S. 2733. A bill to provide for the preservation of assisted housing
for low income elderly persons, disabled persons, and other families;
to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
affordable housing for seniors and families act
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise with great pride to
introduce the Affordable Housing for Seniors and Families Act. I am
very pleased to say that Senator Kerry of Massachusetts and Senator
Sarbanes are original cosponsors of this bill.
Even as our national economy flourishes, many Americans are
struggling to find safe, decent, sanitary, affordable housing. HUD
estimates that 5.4 million families are either paying over half of
their incomes for rent or living in substandard housing. Of these
households, 1.4 million, or 26%, are elderly or disabled. The scarcity
of affordable housing is particularly troubling for seniors and the
disabled who may require special structural accommodations in their
homes.
As Vice Chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Transportation,
and as a member of the Aging Committee, I feel a heightened sense of
urgency in helping these special populations find housing. Thus, I am
pleased to offer a bill which: reauthorizes federal funding for elderly
and disabled housing programs; expands supportive housing opportunities
for these special populations; codifies options to enhance the
financial viability of the projects; assists sponsors in offering a
``continuum of care'' that allows people to live independently and with
dignity; offers incentives to preserve the stock of affordable housing
that is at risk of loss due to prepayment, Section 8 opt-out, or
deterioration; and modernizes current laws allowing the FHA to insure
mortgages on hospitals, assisted living facilities, and nursing homes.
Together, I believe these measures will help to fill the critical
housing needs of elderly and disabled families.
On September 27, 1999, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly
approved the Preserving Affordable Housing for Senior Citizens in the
21st Century Act (H.R. 202) by a vote of 405-5.
[[Page S5242]]
Several aspects of H.R. 202, which protected residents in the event
that their landlords did not renew their project based Section 8
contracts, were included in the FY 2000 VA-HUD appropriations bill. The
legislation I offer today is modeled on the House-passed bill, without
the preservation provisions that have already been enacted. I would
like to take a few moments to highlight the major provisions of this
bill.
The Section 202 elderly housing program and the Section 811 disabled
housing program each provide crucial affordable housing for very low-
income individuals, whose incomes are 50 percent or below of the area
median income. By law, sponsors, or owners, of Section 202 or Section
811 housing must be non-profit organizations. Many sponsors are faith-
based. The Affordable Housing for Seniors and Families Act will
increase the stock of Section 202 and 811 housing in several ways.
First, it reauthorizes funding for Section 202 and 811 housing programs
in the amount of $700 million and $225 million, respectively, in FY 01.
Such sums as are necessary are authorized for FY 02 through FY 04.
Second, it creates an optional matching grant program that will enable
sponsors to leverage additional money for construction. Third, it
allows Section 202 housing sponsors to buy new properties.
This legislation also codifies options giving owners financial
flexibility to use sources of income besides the Section 202 and
Section 811 funds. For instance, by requiring HUD to approve prepayment
of the 202 mortgages, this bill allows sponsors to build equity in
their projects, which can be used to leverage funding for capital
improvements or services for tenants. It gives sponsors maximum
flexibility to use all sources of financing, including federal money,
for construction, amenities, and relevant design features. In order to
raise additional outside revenue and offer a convenience to tenants,
owners are permitted to rent space to commercial facilities. In the
cases of both Section 202 and 811 housing, owners may use their project
reserves to retrofit or modernize obsolete or unmarketable units.
Finally, this bill allows project sponsors to form limited partnerships
with for-profit entities. Through such a partnership, sponsors can also
compete for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, and build larger
developments.
The importance of providing a ``continuum of care'' for seniors and
disabled persons to continue living independently is addressed in the
Affordable Housing for Seniors and Families Act. For example, this bill
helps seniors stay in their apartments as they become older and more
frail by authorizing competitive grants for conversion of elderly
housing and public housing projects designated for occupancy by elderly
persons to assisted living facilities. Responding to obstacles the
handicapped face in finding special-needs housing, it allows private
non-profits to administer tenant-based rental assistance for the
disabled. It also ensures that funding will continue to be invested in
building housing for the disabled by limiting funding for tenant-based
assistance under the Section 811 program to 25% of the program's
appropriation. Funding for service coordinators, who link residents
with supportive or medical services in the community, is authorized
through FY 04. Moreover, service coordinators are permitted to assist
low-income elderly or disabled families in the vicinity of their
projects. Seniors who live in their own houses will be assisted by a
provision in Title V which allows them to maximize the equity in their
homes by streamlining the process of refinancing an existing federal-
insured reverse mortgage.
Title IV of this legislation focuses on preserving the existing stock
of federally assisted properties as affordable housing for low and very
low-income families. Each year, 100,000 low-cost apartments across the
country are demolished, abandoned, or converted to market rate use. For
every 100 extremely low-income households, having 30% or less of area
median income, only 36 units were both affordable and available. Even
in rural areas, the potential loss of assisted, affordable housing is
very real due to prepayment of mortgages, opt-out of assisted housing
programs upon contract expirations, frustration with government
bureaucracy, or simply a recognition that the building would be more
profitable as market-rate housing. Title IV responds with a matching
grant program to assist state and local governments who are devoting
their own money to affordable housing preservation. Likewise, it
authorizes a competitive grant program to assist nonprofits in buying
federally assisted property.
Current law allowing the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) to
insure mortgages on hospitals, nursing homes, and assisted living
facilities has become outdated. Title V modernizes the law and removes
barriers to using FHA insurance for such facilities. Likewise, it
recognizes the integrated nature of healthcare by allowing the FHA to
provide mortgage insurance for ``integrated service facilities,'' such
as ambulatory care centers, which treat sick, injured, disabled,
elderly, or infirm persons.
Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this important
bipartisan legislation. In closing, I would like to express my
gratitude to Senator Kerry for working closely with me on this
important legislation. I also would like to thank Senator Sarbanes for
his cosponsorship.
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. 2733
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE AND TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Affordable
Housing for Seniors and Families Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title and table of contents.
Sec. 2. Regulations.
Sec. 3. Effective date.
TITLE I--REFINANCING FOR SECTION 202 SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY
Sec. 101. Prepayment and refinancing.
TITLE II--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR
THE ELDERLY AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
Sec. 201. Supportive housing for elderly persons.
Sec. 202. Supportive housing for persons with disabilities.
Sec. 203. Service coordinators and congregate services for elderly and
disabled housing.
TITLE III--EXPANDING HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE ELDERLY AND PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES
Subtitle A--Housing for the Elderly
Sec. 301. Matching grant program.
Sec. 302. Eligibility of for-profit limited partnerships.
Sec. 303. Mixed funding sources.
Sec. 304. Authority to acquire structures.
Sec. 305. Mixed-income occupancy.
Sec. 306. Use of project reserves.
Sec. 307. Commercial activities.
Sec. 308. Mixed finance pilot program.
Sec. 309. Grants for conversion of elderly housing to assisted living
facilities.
Sec. 310. Grants for conversion of public housing projects to assisted
living facilities.
Sec. 311. Annual HUD inventory of assisted housing designated for
elderly persons.
Sec. 312. Treatment of applications.
Subtitle B--Housing for Persons With Disabilities
Sec. 321. Matching grant program.
Sec. 322. Eligibility of for-profit limited partnerships.
Sec. 323. Mixed funding sources.
Sec. 324. Tenant-based assistance.
Sec. 325. Use of project reserves.
Sec. 326. Commercial activities.
Subtitle C--Other Provisions
Sec. 341. Service coordinators.
TITLE IV--PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK
Sec. 401. Matching grant program for affordable housing preservation.
Sec. 402. Assistance for nonprofit purchasers preserving affordable
housing.
Sec. 403. Section 236 assistance.
Sec. 404. Preservation projects.
TITLE V--MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR HEALTH CARE FACILITIES AND HOME EQUITY
CONVERSION MORTGAGES
Sec. 501. Rehabilitation of existing hospitals, nursing homes, and
other facilities.
Sec. 502. New integrated service facilities.
Sec. 503. Hospitals and hospital-based integrated service facilities.
Sec. 504. Home equity conversion mortgages.
SEC. 2. REGULATIONS.
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (referred to
in this Act as the ``Secretary'') shall issue any regulations
to carry
[[Page S5243]]
out this Act and the amendments made by this Act that the
Secretary determines may or will affect tenants of federally
assisted housing only after notice and opportunity for public
comment in accordance with the procedure under section 553 of
title 5, United States Code, applicable to substantive rules
(notwithstanding subsections (a)(2), (b)(B), and (d)(3) of
such section). Notice of such proposed rulemaking shall be
provided by publication in the Federal Register. In issuing
such regulations, the Secretary shall take such actions as
may be necessary to ensure that such tenants are notified of,
and provided an opportunity to participate in, the
rulemaking, as required by such section 553.
SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.
(a) In General.--The provisions of this Act and the
amendments made by this Act are effective as of the date of
enactment of this Act, unless such provisions or amendments
specifically provide for effectiveness or applicability upon
another date certain.
(b) Effect of Regulatory Authority.--Any authority in this
Act or the amendments made by this Act to issue regulations,
and any specific requirement to issue regulations by a date
certain, may not be construed to affect the effectiveness or
applicability of the provisions of this Act or the amendments
made by this Act under such provisions and amendments and
subsection (a) of this section.
TITLE I--REFINANCING FOR SECTION 202 SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY
SEC. 101. PREPAYMENT AND REFINANCING.
(a) Approval of Prepayment of Debt.--Upon request of the
project sponsor of a project assisted with a loan under
section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (as in effect before
the enactment of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act), the Secretary shall approve the prepayment of
any indebtedness to the Secretary relating to any remaining
principal and interest under the loan as part of a prepayment
plan under which--
(1) the project sponsor agrees to operate the project until
the maturity date of the original loan under terms at least
as advantageous to existing and future tenants as the terms
required by the original loan agreement or any rental
assistance payments contract under section 8 of the United
States Housing Act of 1937 (or any other rental housing
assistance programs of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development, including the rent supplement program under
section 101 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1965
(12 U.S.C. 1701s)) relating to the project; and
(2) the prepayment may involve refinancing of the loan if
such refinancing results in a lower interest rate on the
principal of the loan for the project and in reductions in
debt service related to such loan.
(b) Sources of Refinancing.--In the case of prepayment
under this section involving refinancing, the project sponsor
may refinance the project through any third party source,
including financing by State and local housing finance
agencies, use of tax-exempt bonds, multi-family mortgage
insurance under the National Housing Act, reinsurance, or
other credit enhancements, including risk sharing as provided
under section 542 of the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1707 note). For purposes of
underwriting a loan insured under the National Housing Act,
the Secretary may assume that any section 8 rental assistance
contract relating to a project will be renewed for the term
of such loan.
(c) Use of Unexpended Amounts.--Upon execution of the
refinancing for a project pursuant to this section, the
Secretary shall make available at least 50 percent of the
annual savings resulting from reduced section 8 or other
rental housing assistance contracts in a manner that is
advantageous to the tenants, including--
(1) not more than 15 percent of the cost of increasing the
availability or provision of supportive services, which may
include the financing of service coordinators and congregate
services;
(2) rehabilitation, modernization, or retrofitting of
structures, common areas, or individual dwelling units;
(3) construction of an addition or other facility in the
project, including assisted living facilities (or, upon the
approval of the Secretary, facilities located in the
community where the project sponsor refinances a project
under this section, or pools shared resources from more than
1 such project); or
(4) rent reduction of unassisted tenants residing in the
project according to a pro rata allocation of shared savings
resulting from the refinancing.
(d) Use of Certain Project Funds.--The Secretary shall
allow a project sponsor that is prepaying and refinancing a
project under this section--
(1) to use any residual receipts held for that project in
excess of $500 per individual dwelling unit for not more than
15 percent of the cost of activities designed to increase the
availability or provision of supportive services; and
(2) to use any reserves for replacement in excess of $1,000
per individual dwelling unit for activities described in
paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (c).
(e) Budget Act Compliance.--This section shall be effective
only to extent or in such amounts that are provided in
advance in appropriation Acts.
TITLE II--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR
THE ELDERLY AND PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
SEC. 201. SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR ELDERLY PERSONS.
Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(m) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for providing assistance under this
section $700,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as
may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2002, 2003, and
2004. Of the amount provided in appropriation Acts for
assistance under this section in each such fiscal year, 5
percent shall be available only for providing assistance in
accordance with the requirements under subsection (c)(4)
(relating to matching funds), except that if there are
insufficient eligible applicants for such assistance, any
amount remaining shall be used for assistance under this
section.''.
SEC. 202. SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES.
Section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013) is amended by striking
subsection (m) and inserting the following:
``(m) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for providing assistance under this
section $225,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 and such sums as
may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2002, 2003, and
2004. Of the amount provided in appropriation Acts for
assistance under this section in each such fiscal year, 5
percent shall be available only for providing assistance in
accordance with the requirements under subsection (d)(5)
(relating to matching funds), except that if there are
insufficient eligible applicants for such assistance, any
amount remaining shall be used for assistance under this
section.''.
SEC. 203. SERVICE COORDINATORS AND CONGREGATE SERVICES FOR
ELDERLY AND DISABLED HOUSING.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary
$50,000,000 for fiscal year 2001, and such sums as may be
necessary for each of fiscal years 2002, 2003, and 2004, for
the following purposes:
(1) Grants for service coordinators for certain federally
assisted multifamily housing.--For grants under section 676
of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42
U.S.C. 13632) for providing service coordinators.
(2) Congregate services for federally assisted housing.--
For contracts under section 802 of the Cranston-Gonzalez
National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8011) to provide
congregate services programs for eligible residents of
eligible housing projects under subparagraphs (B) through (D)
of subsection (k)(6) of such section.
TITLE III--EXPANDING HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE ELDERLY AND PERSONS
WITH DISABILITIES
Subtitle A--Housing for the Elderly
SEC. 301. MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM.
Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (b), in the second sentence, by inserting
``or through matching grants under subsection (c)(4)'' after
``subsection (c)(1)''; and
(2) in subsection (c), by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Matching grants.--
``(A) In general.--
``(i) 15 percent minimum.--Amounts made available for
assistance under this paragraph shall be used only for
capital advances in accordance with paragraph (1), except
that the Secretary shall require that, as a condition of
providing assistance under this paragraph for a project, the
applicant for assistance shall supplement the assistance with
amounts from sources other than this section in an amount
that is not less than 15 percent of the amount of assistance
provided pursuant to this paragraph for the project.
``(ii) Preference.--In providing assistance under this
paragraph, the Secretary shall take into consideration the
degree to which the applicant will supplement that assistance
with amounts from sources other than this section and, all
other factors being equal, shall give preference to
applicants whose supplemental assistance is equal to the
highest percentage of the amount of assistance provided
pursuant to this paragraph for the project.
``(B) Requirement for non-federal funds.--Not less than 50
percent of supplemental amounts provided for a project
pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be from non-Federal
sources. Such supplemental amounts may include the value of
any in-kind contributions, including donated land,
structures, equipment, and other contributions as the
Secretary considers appropriate, but only if the existence of
such in-kind contributions results in the construction of
more dwelling units than would have been constructed absent
such contributions.
``(C) Income eligibility.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this section, the Secretary shall provide that,
in a project assisted under this paragraph, a number of
dwelling units may be made available for occupancy by elderly
persons who are not very low-income persons in a number such
that the ratio that the number of dwelling units in the
project so occupied bears to the total number of units in the
project does not exceed the ratio that the amount from non-
Federal sources provided for the project pursuant to this
paragraph bears to the sum of the capital advances provided
for the project
[[Page S5244]]
under this paragraph and all supplemental amounts for the
project provided pursuant to this paragraph.''.
SEC. 302. ELIGIBILITY OF FOR-PROFIT LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS.
Section 202(k)(4) of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C.
1701q(k)(4)) is amended by inserting after subparagraph (C)
the following:
``Such term includes a for-profit limited partnership the
sole general partner of which is an organization meeting the
requirements under subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), or a
corporation wholly owned and controlled by an organization
meeting the requirements under subparagraphs (A), (B), and
(C).''.
SEC. 303. MIXED FUNDING SOURCES.
Section 202(h)(6) of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C.
1701q(h)(6)) is amended by striking ``non-Federal sources''
and inserting ``sources other than this section''.
SEC. 304. AUTHORITY TO ACQUIRE STRUCTURES.
Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``from the Resolution
Trust Corporation''; and
(2) in subsection (h)(2)--
(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``RTC
properties'' and inserting ``Acquisition''; and
(B) by striking ``from the Resolution'' and all that
follows through ``Insurance Act''.
SEC. 305. MIXED-INCOME OCCUPANCY.
(a) In General.--The first sentence of section 202(i)(1) of
the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q(i)(1)) is amended by
striking ``and (B)'' and inserting the following: ``(B)
notwithstanding subparagraph (A) and in the case only of a
supportive housing project for the elderly that has a high
vacancy level (as defined by the Secretary, except that such
term shall not include vacancy upon the initial availability
of units in a building), consistent with the purpose of
improving housing opportunities for very low- and low-income
elderly persons; and (C).''.
(b) Availability of Units.--Section 202(i) of the Housing
Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q(i)) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(3) Availability of units.--In the case of a supportive
housing project described in paragraph (1)(B) that has a
vacant dwelling unit, an owner may not make a dwelling unit
available for occupancy by, nor make any commitment to
provide occupancy in the unit to--
``(A) a low-income family that is not a very low-income
family unless each eligible very low-income family that has
applied for occupancy in the project has been offered an
opportunity to accept occupancy in a unit in the project; and
``(B) a low-income elderly person who is not a very low-
income elderly person, unless the owner certifies to the
Secretary that the owner has engaged in affirmative marketing
and outreach to very low-income elderly persons.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 202 of the Housing Act
of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by inserting before ``in accordance
with this section'' the following: ``, and for low-income
elderly persons to the extent such occupancy is made
available pursuant to subsection (i)(1)(B),'';
(B) in the first sentence of paragraph (2), by inserting
after ``elderly persons'' the following: ``or by low-income
elderly persons (to the extent such occupancy is made
available pursuant to subsection (i)(1)(B))''; and
(C) in paragraph (3), by inserting after ``very low-income
person'' the following: ``or a low-income person (to the
extent such occupancy is made available pursuant to
subsection (i)(1)(B))'';
(2) in subsection (d)(1), by inserting after ``elderly
persons'' the following: ``, and low-income elderly persons
to the extent such occupancy is made available pursuant to
subsection (i)(1)(B),''; and
(3) in subsection (k)--
(A) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (8) as
paragraphs (4) through (9), respectively; and
(B) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) Low-income.--The term `low-income' has the meaning
given the term `low-income families' under section 3(b)(2) of
the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437a(b)(2)).''.
SEC. 306. USE OF PROJECT RESERVES.
Section 202(j) of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C.
1701q(j)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(8) Use of project reserves.--Amounts for project
reserves for a project assisted under this section may be
used for costs, subject to reasonable limitations as the
Secretary determines appropriate, for reducing the number of
dwelling units in the project. Such use shall be subject to
the approval of the Secretary to ensure that the use is
designed to retrofit units that are currently obsolete or
unmarketable.''.
SEC. 307. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES.
Section 202(h)(1) of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C.
1701q(h)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Neither this section nor any other provision of law may be
construed as prohibiting or preventing the location and
operation, in a project assisted under this section, of
commercial facilities for the benefit of residents of the
project and the community in which the project is located,
except that assistance made available under this section may
not be used to subsidize any such commercial facility.''.
SEC. 308. MIXED FINANCE PILOT PROGRAM.
(a) Authority.--The Secretary shall carry out a pilot
program under this section to determine the effectiveness and
feasibility of providing assistance under section 202 of the
Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) for housing projects
that are used both for supportive housing for the elderly and
for other types of housing, which may include market rate
housing.
(b) Scope.--Under the pilot program the Secretary shall
provide, to the extent that sufficient approvable
applications for such assistance are received, assistance in
the manner provided under subsection (d) for not more than 5
housing projects.
(c) Mixed Use.--The Secretary shall, for a project to be
assisted under the pilot program--
(1) require that a minimum number of the dwelling units in
the project be reserved for use in accordance with, and
subject to, the requirements applicable to units assisted
under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959, such that the
ratio that the number of dwelling units in the project so
reserved bears to the total number of units in the project is
not less than the ratio that the amount of assistance from
such section 202 used for the project pursuant to subsection
(d) bears to the total amount of assistance provided for the
project under this section; and
(2) provide that the remainder of the dwelling units in the
project may be used for assistance to persons who are not
very low-income.
(d) Financing.--The Secretary may use amounts provided for
assistance under section 202 of the Housing Act of 1959 for
assistance under the pilot program for capital advances in
accordance with subsection (c)(1) of such section and project
rental assistance in accordance with subsection (c)(2) of
such section, only for dwelling units described in subsection
(c)(1) of this section. Any assistance provided pursuant to
subsection (c)(1) of such section 202 shall be provided in
the form of a capital advance, subject to repayment as
provided in such subsection, and shall not be structured as a
loan. The Secretary shall take such action as may be
necessary to ensure that the repayment contingency under such
subsection is enforceable for projects assisted under the
pilot program and to provide for appropriate protections of
the interests of the Secretary in relation to other interests
in the projects so assisted.
(e) Report.--Not later than 2 years after assistance is
initially made available under the pilot program under this
section, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on
the results of the pilot program.
SEC. 309. GRANTS FOR CONVERSION OF ELDERLY HOUSING TO
ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES.
Title II of the Housing Act of 1959 is amended by inserting
after section 202a (12 U.S.C. 1701q-1) the following:
``SEC. 202B. GRANTS FOR CONVERSION OF ELDERLY HOUSING TO
ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES.
``(a) Grant Authority.--The Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development may make grants in accordance with this section
to owners of eligible projects described in subsection (b)
for 1 or both of the following activities:
``(1) Repairs.--Substantial capital repairs to a project
that are needed to rehabilitate, modernize, or retrofit aging
structures, common areas, or individual dwelling units.
``(2) Conversion.--Activities designed to convert dwelling
units in the eligible project to assisted living facilities
for elderly persons.
``(b) Eligible Projects.--
``(1) In general.--An eligible project described in this
subsection is a multifamily housing project that is--
``(A) described in subparagraph (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), or
(G) of section 683(2) of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13641(2)), or (B) only to
the extent amounts of the Department of Agriculture are made
available to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
for such grants under this section for such projects, subject
to a loan made or insured under section 515 of the Housing
Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C. 1485);
``(B) owned by a private nonprofit organization (as such
term is defined in section 202); and
``(C) designated primarily for occupancy by elderly
persons.
``(2) Unused or underutilized commercial property.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection or
this section, an unused or underutilized commercial property
may be considered an eligible project under this subsection,
except that the Secretary may not provide grants under this
section for more than 3 such properties. For any such
projects, any reference under this section to dwelling units
shall be considered to refer to the premises of such
properties.
``(c) Applications.--Applications for grants under this
section shall be submitted to the Secretary in accordance
with such procedures as the Secretary shall establish. Such
applications shall contain--
``(1) a description of the substantial capital repairs or
the proposed conversion activities for which a grant under
this section is requested;
``(2) the amount of the grant requested to complete the
substantial capital repairs or conversion activities;
``(3) a description of the resources that are expected to
be made available, if any, in conjunction with the grant
under this section; and
[[Page S5245]]
``(4) such other information or certifications that the
Secretary determines to be necessary or appropriate.
``(d) Funding for Services.--The Secretary may not make a
grant under this section for conversion activities unless the
application contains sufficient evidence, in the
determination of the Secretary, of firm commitments for the
funding of services to be provided in the assisted living
facility, which may be provided by third parties.
``(e) Selection Criteria.--The Secretary shall select
applications for grants under this section based upon
selection criteria, which shall be established by the
Secretary and shall include--
``(1) in the case of a grant for substantial capital
repairs, the extent to which the project to be repaired is in
need of such repair, including such factors as the age of
improvements to be repaired, and the impact on the health and
safety of residents of failure to make such repairs;
``(2) in the case of a grant for conversion activities, the
extent to which the conversion is likely to provide assisted
living facilities that are needed or are expected to be
needed by the categories of elderly persons that the assisted
living facility is intended to serve, with a special emphasis
on very low-income elderly persons who need assistance with
activities of daily living;
``(3) the inability of the applicant to fund the repairs or
conversion activities from existing financial resources, as
evidenced by the applicant's financial records, including
assets in the applicant's residual receipts account and
reserves for replacement account;
``(4) the extent to which the applicant has evidenced
community support for the repairs or conversion, by such
indicators as letters of support from the local community for
the repairs or conversion and financial contributions from
public and private sources;
``(5) in the case of a grant for conversion activities, the
extent to which the applicant demonstrates a strong
commitment to promoting the autonomy and independence of the
elderly persons that the assisted living facility is intended
to serve;
``(6) in the case of a grant for conversion activities, the
quality, completeness, and managerial capability of providing
the services which the assisted living facility intends to
provide to elderly residents, especially in such areas as
meals, 24-hour staffing, and on-site health care; and
``(7) such other criteria as the Secretary determines to be
appropriate to ensure that funds made available under this
section are used effectively.
``(f) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the term `assisted living facility' has the meaning
given such term in section 232(b) of the National Housing Act
(12 U.S.C. 1715w(b)); and
``(2) the definitions in section 202(k) shall apply.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for providing grants under this section
such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2001,
2002, 2003, and 2004.''.
SEC. 310. GRANTS FOR CONVERSION OF PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECTS TO
ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES.
Title I of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 36. GRANTS FOR CONVERSION OF PUBLIC HOUSING TO
ASSISTED LIVING FACILITIES.
``(a) Grant Authority.--The Secretary may make grants in
accordance with this section to public housing agencies for
use for activities designed to convert dwelling units in an
eligible projects described in subsection (b) to assisted
living facilities for elderly persons.
``(b) Eligible Projects.--An eligible project described in
this subsection is a public housing project (or a portion
thereof) that has been designated under section 7 for
occupancy only by elderly persons.
``(c) Applications.--Applications for grants under this
section shall be submitted to the Secretary in accordance
with such procedures as the Secretary shall establish. Such
applications shall contain--
``(1) a description of the proposed conversion activities
for which a grant under this section is requested;
``(2) the amount of the grant requested;
``(3) a description of the resources that are expected to
be made available, if any, in conjunction with the grant
under this section; and
``(4) such other information or certifications that the
Secretary determines to be necessary or appropriate.
``(d) Funding for Services.--The Secretary may not make a
grant under this section unless the application contains
sufficient evidence, in the determination of the Secretary,
of firm commitments for the funding of services to be
provided in the assisted living facility.
``(e) Selection Criteria.--The Secretary shall select
applications for grants under this section based upon
selection criteria, which shall be established by the
Secretary and shall include--
``(1) the extent to which the conversion is likely to
provide assisted living facilities that are needed or are
expected to be needed by the categories of elderly persons
that the assisted living facility is intended to serve;
``(2) the inability of the public housing agency to fund
the conversion activities from existing financial resources,
as evidenced by the agency's financial records;
``(3) the extent to which the agency has evidenced
community support for the conversion, by such indicators as
letters of support from the local community for the
conversion and financial contributions from public and
private sources;
``(4) extent to which the applicant demonstrates a strong
commitment to promoting the autonomy and independence of the
elderly persons that the assisted living facility is intended
to serve;
``(5) the quality, completeness, and managerial capability
of providing the services which the assisted living facility
intends to provide to elderly residents, especially in such
areas as meals, 24-hour staffing, and on-site health care;
and
``(6) such other criteria as the Secretary determines to be
appropriate to ensure that funds made available under this
section are used effectively.
``(f) Definition.--In this section, the term `assisted
living facility' has the meaning given such term in section
232(b) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715w(b)).
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for providing grants under this section
such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2001,
2002, 2003, and 2004.''.
SEC. 311. ANNUAL HUD INVENTORY OF ASSISTED HOUSING DESIGNATED
FOR ELDERLY PERSONS.
Subtitle D of title VI of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13611 et seq.) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 662. ANNUAL INVENTORY OF ASSISTED HOUSING DESIGNATED
FOR ELDERLY PERSONS.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish and
maintain, and on an annual basis shall update and publish, an
inventory of housing that--
``(1) is assisted under a program of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, including all federally
assisted housing; and
``(2) is designated, in whole or in part, for occupancy by
elderly families or disabled families, or both.
``(b) Contents.--The inventory required under this section
shall identify housing described in subsection (a) and the
number of dwelling units in such housing that--
``(1) are in projects designated for occupancy only by
elderly families;
``(2) are in projects designated for occupancy only by
disabled families;
``(3) contain special features or modifications designed to
accommodate persons with disabilities and are in projects
designated for occupancy only by disabled families;
``(4) are in projects for which a specific percentage or
number of the dwelling units are designated for occupancy
only by elderly families;
``(5) are in projects for which a specific percentage or
number of the dwelling units are designated for occupancy
only by disabled families; and
``(6) are in projects designed for occupancy only by both
elderly or disabled families.
``(c) Publication.--The Secretary shall annually publish
the inventory required under this section in the Federal
Register and shall make the inventory available to the public
by posting on a World Wide Web site of the Department.''.
SEC. 312. TREATMENT OF APPLICATIONS.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law or any
regulation of the Secretary, in the case of any denial of an
application for assistance under section 202 of the Housing
Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C. 1701q) for failure to timely provide
information required by the Secretary, the Secretary shall
notify the applicant of the failure and provide the applicant
an opportunity to show that the failure was due to the
failure of a third party to provide information under the
control of the third party. If the applicant demonstrates,
within a reasonable period of time after notification of such
failure, that the applicant did not have such information but
requested the timely provision of such information by the
third party, the Secretary may not deny the application
solely on the grounds of failure to timely provide such
information.
Subtitle B--Housing for Persons With Disabilities
SEC. 321. MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM.
Section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(2)(A), by inserting ``or through
matching grants under subsection (d)(5)'' after ``subsection
(d)(1)''; and
(2) in subsection (d), by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Matching grants.--
``(A) In general.--
``(i) 15 percent minimum.--Amounts made available for
assistance under this paragraph shall be used only for
capital advances in accordance with paragraph (1), except
that the Secretary shall require that, as a condition of
providing assistance under this paragraph for a project, the
applicant for assistance shall supplement the assistance with
amounts from sources other than this section in an amount
that is not less than 15 percent of the amount of assistance
provided pursuant to this paragraph for the project.
``(ii) Preference.--In providing assistance under this
paragraph, the Secretary shall take into consideration the
degree to which the applicant will supplement that assistance
with amounts from sources other than this section and, all
other factors being equal, shall give preference to
applicants whose supplemental assistance is equal to
[[Page S5246]]
the highest percentage of the amount of assistance provided
pursuant to this paragraph for the project.
``(B) Requirement for non-federal funds.--Not less than 50
percent of supplemental amounts provided for a project
pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be from non-Federal
sources. Such supplemental amounts may include the value of
any in-kind contributions, including donated land,
structures, equipment, and other contributions as the
Secretary considers appropriate, but only if the existence of
such in-kind contributions results in the construction of
more dwelling units than would have been constructed absent
such contributions.
``(C) Income eligibility.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of this section, the Secretary shall provide that,
in a project assisted under this paragraph, a number of
dwelling units may be made available for occupancy by persons
with disabilities who are not very low-income persons in a
number such that the ration that the number of dwelling units
in the project so occupied bears to the total number of units
in the project does not exceed the ratio that the amount from
non-Federal sources provided for the project pursuant to this
paragraph bears to the sum of the capital advances provided
for the project under this paragraph and all supplemental
amounts for the project provided pursuant to this
paragraph.''.
SEC. 322. ELIGIBILITY OF FOR-PROFIT LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS.
Section 811(k)(6) of the Housing Act of 1959 (42 U.S.C.
8013(k)(6)) is amended by inserting after subparagraph (D)
the following:
``Such term includes a for-profit limited partnership the
sole general partner of which is an organization meeting the
requirements under subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) or a
corporation wholly owned and controlled by an organization
meeting the requirements under subparagraphs (A), (B), (C),
and (D).''.
SEC. 323. MIXED FUNDING SOURCES.
Section 811(h)(5) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013(h)(5)) is amended by
striking ``non-Federal sources'' and inserting ``sources
other than this section''.
SEC. 324. TENANT-BASED ASSISTANCE.
Section 811 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d), by striking paragraph (4) and
inserting the following:
``(4) Tenant-based rental assistance.--
``(A) Administering entities.--Tenant-based rental
assistance provided under subsection (b)(1) may be provided
only through a public housing agency that has submitted and
had approved an plan under section 7(d) of the United States
Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437e(d)) that provides for
such assistance, or through a private nonprofit organization.
A public housing agency shall be eligible to apply under this
section only for the purposes of providing such tenant-based
rental assistance.
``(B) Program rules.--Tenant-based rental assistance under
subsection (b)(1) shall be made available to eligible persons
with disabilities and administered under the same rules that
govern tenant-based rental assistance made available under
section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937, except
that the Secretary may waive or modify such rules, but only
to the extent necessary to provide for administering such
assistance under subsection (b)(1) through private nonprofit
organizations rather than through public housing agencies.
``(C) Allocation of assistance.--In determining the amount
of assistance provided under subsection (b)(1) for a private
nonprofit organization or public housing agency, the
Secretary shall consider the needs and capabilities of the
organization or agency, in the case of a public housing
agency, as described in the plan for the agency under section
7 of the United States Housing Act of 1937.''; and
(2) in subsection (l)(1)--
(A) by striking ``subsection (b)'' and inserting
``subsection (b)(2)'';
(B) by striking the last comma and all that follows through
``subsection (n)''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following: ``Notwithstanding
any other provision of this section, the Secretary may use
not more than 25 percent of the total amounts made available
for assistance under this section for any fiscal year for
tenant-based rental assistance under subsection (b)(1) for
persons with disabilities, and no authority of the Secretary
to waive provisions of this section may be used to alter the
percentage limitation under this sentence.''.
SEC. 325. USE OF PROJECT RESERVES.
Section 811(j) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable
Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013(j)) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(7) Use of project reserves.--Amounts for project
reserves for a project assisted under this section may be
used for costs, subject to reasonable limitations as the
Secretary determines appropriate, for reducing the number of
dwelling units in the project. Such use shall be subject to
the approval of the Secretary to ensure that the use is
designed to retrofit units that are currently obsolete or
unmarketable.''.
SEC. 326. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES.
Section 811(h)(1) of the Cranston-Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 8013(h)(1)) is amended by
adding at the end the following: ``Neither this section nor
any other provision of law may be construed as prohibiting or
preventing the location and operation, in a project assisted
under this section, of commercial facilities for the benefit
of residents of the project and the community in which the
project is located, except that assistance made available
under this section may not be used to subsidize any such
commercial facility.''.
Subtitle C--Other Provisions
SEC. 341. SERVICE COORDINATORS.
(a) Increased Flexibility for Use of Service Coordinators
in Certain Federally Assisted Housing.--Section 676 of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.
13632) is amended--
(1) in the section heading, by striking ``MULTIFAMILY
HOUSING ASSISTED UNDER NATIONAL HOUSING ACT'' and inserting
``CERTAIN FEDERALLY ASSISTED HOUSING'';
(2) in subsection (a)--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``(E) and (F)'' and
inserting ``(B), (C), (D), (E), (F), and (G)''; and
(B) in the last sentence--
(i) by striking ``section 661'' and inserting ``section
671''; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following: ``A service
coordinator funded with a grant under this section for a
project may provide services to low-income elderly or
disabled families living in the vicinity of such project.'';
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) by striking ``(E) or (F)'' and inserting ``(B), (C),
(D), (E), (F), or (G)''; and
(B) by striking ``section 661'' and inserting ``section
671''; and
(4) by striking subsection (c) and redesignating subsection
(d) (as amended by paragraph (3) of this subsection) as
subsection (c).
(b) Requirement To Provide Service Coordinators.--Section
671 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42
U.S.C. 13631) is amended--
(1) in the first sentence of subsection (a), by striking
``to carry out this subtitle pursuant to the amendments made
by this subtitle'' and inserting the following: ``for
providing service coordinators under this section'';
(2) in subsection (d), by inserting ``)'' after ``section
683(2)''; and
(3) by adding at the end following:
``(e) Services for Low-Income Elderly or Disabled Families
Residing in Vicinity of Certain Projects.--To the extent only
that this section applies to service coordinators for covered
federally assisted housing described in subparagraphs (B),
(C), (D), (E), (F), and (G) of section 683(2), any reference
in this section to elderly or disabled residents of a project
shall be construed to include low-income elderly or disabled
families living in the vicinity of such project.''.
(c) Protection Against Telemarketing Fraud.--
(1) Supportive housing for the elderly.--The first sentence
of section 202(g)(1) of the Housing Act of 1959 (12 U.S.C.
1701q(g)(1)) is amended by striking ``and (F)'' and inserting
the following: ``(F) providing education and outreach
regarding telemarketing fraud, in accordance with the
standards issued under section 671(f) of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 13631(f)); and
(G)''.
(2) Other federally assisted housing.--Section 671 of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C.
13631), as amended by subsection (b) of this section, is
further amended--
(A) in the first sentence of subsection (c), by inserting
after ``response,'' the following: ``education and outreach
regarding telemarketing fraud in accordance with the
standards issued under subsection (f),''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
``(f) Protection Against Telemarketing Fraud.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall establish
standards for service coordinators in federally assisted
housing who are providing education and outreach to elderly
persons residing in such housing regarding telemarketing
fraud. The standards shall be designed to ensure that such
education and outreach informs such elderly persons of the
dangers of telemarketing fraud and facilitates the
investigation and prosecution of telemarketers engaging in
fraud against such residents.
``(2) Contents.--The standards established under this
subsection shall require that any such education and outreach
be provided in a manner that--
``(A) informs such residents of--
``(i) the prevalence of telemarketing fraud targeted
against elderly persons;
``(ii) how telemarketing fraud works;
``(iii) how to identify telemarketing fraud;
``(iv) how to protect themselves against telemarketing
fraud, including an explanation of the dangers of providing
bank account, credit card, or other financial or personal
information over the telephone to unsolicited callers;
``(v) how to report suspected attempts at telemarketing
fraud; and
``(vi) their consumer protection rights under Federal law;
``(B) provides such other information as the Secretary
considers necessary to protect such residents against
fraudulent telemarketing; and
``(C) disseminates the information provided by appropriate
means, and in determining such appropriate means, the
Secretary shall consider on-site presentations at federally
[[Page S5247]]
assisted housing, public service announcements, a printed
manual or pamphlet, an Internet website, and telephone
outreach to residents whose names appear on `mooch lists'
confiscated from fraudulent telemarketers.''.
TITLE IV--PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK
SEC. 401. MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PRESERVATION.
(a) Findings and Purposes.--
(1) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(A) availability of low-income housing rental units has
declined nationwide in the last several years;
(B) as rents for low-income housing increase and the
development of new units of affordable housing decreases,
there are fewer privately owned, federally assisted
affordable housing units available to low-income individuals
in need;
(C) the demand for affordable housing far exceeds the
supply of such housing, as evidenced by recent studies; and
(D) the efforts of nonprofit organizations have
significantly preserved and expanded access to low-income
housing.
(2) Purposes.--The purposes of this section are--
(A) to continue the partnerships among the Federal
Government, State and local governments, nonprofit
organizations, and the private sector in operating and
assisting housing that is affordable to low-income persons
and families;
(B) to promote the preservation of affordable housing units
by providing matching grants to States and localities that
have developed and funded programs for the preservation of
privately owned housing that is affordable to low-income
families and persons; and
(C) to minimize the involuntary displacement of tenants who
are currently residing in such housing, many of whom are
elderly or disabled persons and families with children.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Capital expenditures.--The term ``capital
expenditures'' includes expenditures for acquisition and
rehabilitation.
(2) Low-income affordability restrictions.--The term ``low-
income affordability restrictions'' means, with respect to a
housing project, any limitations imposed by law, regulation,
or regulatory agreement on rents for tenants of the project,
rent contributions for tenants of the project, or income-
eligibility for occupancy in the project.
(3) Project-based assistance.--The term ``project-based
assistance'' has the meaning given such term in section 16(c)
of the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C.
1437n(c)), except that such term includes assistance under
any successor programs to the programs referred to in such
section.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Housing and Urban Development.
(5) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States and the District of Columbia.
(c) Authority.--The Secretary shall, to the extent amounts
are made available in advance under subsection (k), award
grants under this section to States and localities for low-
income housing preservation and promotion.
(d) Applications.--The Secretary shall provide for States
and localities (through appropriate State and local agencies)
to submit applications for grants under this section. The
Secretary shall require the applications to contain any
information and certifications necessary for the Secretary to
determine who is eligible to receive such a grant.
(e) Use of Grants.--
(1) Eligible uses.--
(A) In general.--Amounts from grants awarded under this
section may be used by States and localities only for the
purpose of providing assistance for acquisition,
rehabilitation, operating costs, and capital expenditures for
a housing project that meets the requirements under paragraph
(2), (3), (4), or (5).
(B) Factors for consideration.--In selecting projects
described in subparagraph (A) for assistance with amounts
from a grant awarded under this section, the State or
locality shall--
(i) take into consideration--
(I) whether the assistance will be used to transfer the
project to a resident-endorsed nonprofit organization;
(II) whether the owner of the project has extended the low-
income affordability restrictions on the project for a period
of more than 15 years;
(III) the extent to which the project is consistent with
the comprehensive housing affordability strategy approved in
accordance with section 105 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National
Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12705) for the jurisdiction
in which the project is located;
(IV) the extent to which the project location provides
access to transportation, jobs, shopping, and other similar
conveniences;
(V) the extent to which the project meets fair housing
goals;
(VI) the extent to which the project serves specific needs
that are not otherwise met by the local market, such as
housing for the elderly or disabled, or families with
children;
(VII) the extent of local government resources provided to
the project; and
(VIII) such other factors as the Secretary or the State or
locality may establish; and
(ii) States receiving funds shall ensure that, to the
maximum extent practicable, projects in both urban and rural
areas in the State receive assistance.
(2) Projects with hud-insured mortgages.--A project meets
the requirements under this paragraph only if--
(A) the project is financed by a loan or mortgage that is--
(i) insured or held by the Secretary under section
221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715l(d)(3))
and receiving loan management assistance under section 8 of
the United States Housing Act of 1937 (42 U.S.C. 1437f) due
to a conversion from section 101 of the Housing and Urban
Development Act of 1965 (12 U.S.C. 1701s);
(ii) insured or held by the Secretary and bears interest at
a rate determined under the proviso of section 221(d)(5) of
the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715l(d)(5)); or
(iii) insured, assisted, or held by the Secretary or a
State or State agency under section 236 of the National
Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-1);
(B) the project is subject to an unconditional waiver of,
with respect to the mortgage referred to in subparagraph
(A)--
(i) all rights to any prepayment of the mortgage; and
(ii) all rights to any voluntary termination of the
mortgage insurance contract for the mortgage; and
(C) if the low-income affordability restrictions on the
project are for less than 15 years, the owner of the project
has entered into binding commitments (applicable to any
subsequent owner) to extend those restrictions, including any
such restrictions imposed because of any contract for
project-based assistance for the project, for a period of not
less than 15 years (beginning on the date on which assistance
is made available for the project by the State or locality
under this section).
(3) Projects with section 8 project-based assistance.--A
project meets the requirements under this paragraph only if--
(A) the project is subject to a contract for project-based
assistance; and
(B) the owner of the project has entered into binding
commitments (applicable to any subsequent owner)--
(i) to continue to renew such contract (if offered on the
same terms and conditions) until the later of--
(I) the last day of the remaining term of the mortgage; or
(II) the date that is 15 years after the date on which
assistance is made available for the project by the State or
locality under this subsection; and
(ii) to extend any low-income affordability restrictions
applicable to the project in connection with such assistance.
(4) Projects purchased by residents.--A project meets the
requirements under this paragraph only if the project--
(A) is or was eligible low-income housing (as defined in
section 229 of the Low-Income Housing Preservation and
Resident Homeownership Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 4119)) or is or
was a project assisted under section 613(b) of the Cranston-
Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 4125(b));
(B) has been purchased by a resident council or resident-
approved nonprofit organization for the housing or is
approved by the Secretary for such purchase, for conversion
to homeownership housing under a resident homeownership
program meeting the requirements under section 226 of such
Act (12 U.S.C. 4116); and
(C) the owner of the project has entered into binding
commitments (applicable to any subsequent owner) to extend
such assistance for not less than 15 years (beginning on the
date on which assistance is made available for the project by
the State or locality under this section) and to extend any
low-income affordability restrictions applicable to the
project in connection with such assistance.
(5) Rural rental assistance projects.--A project meets the
requirements of this paragraph only if--
(A) the project is a rural rental housing project financed
under section 515 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C.
1485); and
(B) the restriction on the use of the project (as required
under section 502 of the Housing Act of 1949 (42 U.S.C.
1472)) will expire not later than 12 months after the date on
which assistance is made available for the project by the
State or locality under this subsection.
(f) Amount of State and Local Grants.--
(1) In general.--Subject to subsection (g), in each fiscal
year, the Secretary shall award to each State and locality
approved for a grant under this section a grant in an amount
based upon the proportion of such State's or locality's need
for assistance under this section (as determined by the
Secretary in accordance with paragraph (2)) to the aggregate
need among all States and localities approved for such
assistance for such fiscal year.
(2) Determination of need.--In determining the proportion
of a State's or locality's need under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall consider--
(A) the number of units in projects in the State or
locality that are eligible for assistance under section 6
that, due to market conditions or other factors, are at risk
for prepayment, opt-out, or otherwise at risk of being lost
to the inventory of affordable housing; and
(B) the difficulty that residents of projects in the State
or locality that are eligible for assistance under subsection
(e) would face in
[[Page S5248]]
finding adequate, available, decent, comparable, and
affordable housing in neighborhoods of comparable quality in
the local market, if those projects were not assisted by the
State or locality under subsection (e).
(g) Matching Requirement.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary may not award a grant under
this section to a State or locality for any fiscal year in an
amount that exceeds twice the amount that the State or
locality certifies, as the Secretary shall require, that the
State or locality will contribute for such fiscal year, or
has contributed since January 1, 2000, from non-Federal
sources for the purposes described in subsection (e)(1).
(2) Treatment of previous contributions.--Any portion of
amounts contributed after January 1, 2000, that are counted
for purposes of meeting the requirement under paragraph (1)
for a fiscal year may not be counted for such purposes for
any subsequent fiscal year.
(3) Treatment of tax incentives.--Fifty percent of the
funds used for the project that are allocable to tax credits
allocated under section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, revenue from mortgage revenue bonds issued under
section 143 of such Code, or proceeds from the sale of tax-
exempt bonds by any State or local government entity shall be
considered non-Federal sources for purposes of this
subsection.
(h) Treatment of Subsidy Layering Requirements.--Neither
subsection (g) nor any other provision of this section may be
construed to prevent the use of tax credits allocated under
section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in connection
with housing assisted with amounts from a grant awarded under
this section, to the extent that such use is in accordance
with section 102(d) of the Department of Housing and Urban
Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545(d)) and
section 911 of the Housing and Community Development Act of
1992 (42 U.S.C. 3545 note).
(i) Reports.--
(1) Reports to secretary.--Not later than 90 days after the
last day of each fiscal year, each State and locality that
receives a grant under this section during that fiscal year
shall submit to the Secretary a report on the housing
projects assisted with amounts made available under the
grant.
(2) Reports to congress.--Based on the reports submitted
under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall annually submit to
Congress a report on the grants awarded under this section
during the preceding fiscal year and the housing projects
assisted with amounts made available under those grants.
(j) Regulations.--Not later than 12 months after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue
regulations to carry out this section.
(k) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated for grants under this section such sums as
may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2004.
SEC. 402. ASSISTANCE FOR NONPROFIT PURCHASERS PRESERVING
AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
(a) Congressional Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) a substantial number of existing federally assisted or
federally insured multifamily properties are at risk of being
lost from the affordable housing inventory of the Nation
through market rate conversion, deterioration, or demolition;
(2) it is in the interests of the Nation to encourage
transfer of control of such properties to competent national,
regional, and local nonprofit entities and intermediaries
whose missions involve maintaining the affordability of such
properties;
(3) such transfers may be inhibited by a shortage of such
entities that are appropriately capitalized; and
(4) the Nation would be well served by providing assistance
to such entities to aid in accomplishing this purpose.
(b) Grants.--The Secretary may make grants, to the extent
amounts are made available for such grants, to eligible
entities under subsection (c) for use only for operational,
working capital, and organizational expenses of such entities
and activities by such entities to acquire eligible
affordable housing for the purpose of ensuring that the
housing will remain affordable, as the Secretary considers
appropriate, for low-income or very low-income families
(including elderly persons).
(c) Eligible Entities.--The Secretary shall establish
standards for eligible entities under this subsection, which
shall include requirements that to be considered an eligible
entity for purposes of this section an entity shall--
(1) be a nonprofit organization (as such term is defined in
104 of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing
Act);
(2) have among its purposes maintaining the affordability
to low-income or very low-income families of multifamily
properties that are at risk of loss from the inventory of
housing that is affordable to low-income or very low-income
families; and
(3) demonstrate need for assistance under this section for
the purposes under subsection (b), experience in carrying out
activities referred to in such subsection, and capability to
carry out such activities.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Eligible affordable housing.--The term ``eligible
affordable housing'' means housing that--
(A) consists of more than four dwelling units;
(B) is insured or assisted under a program of the
Department of Housing and Urban Development or the Department
of Agriculture under which the property is subject to
limitations on tenant rents, rent contributions, or incomes;
and
(C) is at risk, as determined by the Secretary, of
termination of any of the limitations referred to in
subparagraph (B).
(2) Low-income families; very low-income families.--The
terms ``low-income families'' and very low-income families''
have the meanings given such terms in section 3(b) of the
United States Housing Act of 1937.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated for grants under this section such sums as
may be necessary for each of fiscal years 2001, 2002, 2003,
and 2004.
SEC. 403. SECTION 236 ASSISTANCE.
Section 236(g) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C.
1715z-1(g)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``Subject to paragraph
(3) and notwithstanding'' and inserting ``Notwithstanding'';
and
(2) by striking paragraph (3) and redesignating paragraph
(4) as paragraph (3).
SEC. 404. PRESERVATION PROJECTS.
Section 524(e)(1) of the Multifamily Assisted Housing
Reform and Affordability Act of 1997 (42 U.S.C. 1437f note)
is amended by striking ``amounts are specifically'' and
inserting ``sufficient amounts are''.
TITLE V--MORTGAGE INSURANCE FOR HEALTH CARE FACILITIES AND HOME EQUITY
CONVERSION MORTGAGES
SEC. 501. REHABILITATION OF EXISTING HOSPITALS, NURSING
HOMES, AND OTHER FACILITIES.
Section 223(f) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C.
1715n(f)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) by striking ``the refinancing of existing debt of an'';
and
(B) by inserting ``existing integrated service facility,''
after ``existing board and care home,'';
(2) in paragraph (4)--
(A) by inserting ``existing integrated service facility,''
after ``board and care home,'' each place it appears;
(B) in subparagraph (A), by inserting before the semicolon
at the end the following: ``, which refinancing, in the case
of a loan on a hospital, home, or facility that is within 2
years of maturity, shall include a mortgage made to prepay
such loan'';
(C) in subparagraph (B), by inserting after
``indebtedness'' the following: ``, pay any other costs
including repairs, maintenance, minor improvements, or
additional equipment which may be approved by the
Secretary,''; and
(D) in subparagraph (D)--
(i) by inserting ``existing'' before ``intermediate care
facility''; and
(ii) by inserting ``existing'' before ``board and care
home''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(6) In the case of purchase of an existing hospital (or
existing nursing home, existing assisted living facility,
existing intermediate care facility, existing board and care
home, existing integrated service facility or any combination
thereof) the Secretary shall prescribe such terms and
conditions as the Secretary deems necessary to assure that--
``(A) the proceeds of the insured mortgage loan will be
employed only for the purchase of the existing hospital (or
existing nursing home, existing assisted living facility,
existing intermediate care facility, existing board and care
home, existing integrated service facility or any combination
thereof) including the retirement of existing debt (if any),
necessary costs associated with the purchase and the insured
mortgage financing, and such other costs, including costs of
repairs, maintenance, improvements, and additional equipment,
as may be approved by the Secretary;
``(B) such existing hospital (or existing nursing home,
existing assisted living facility, existing intermediate care
facility, existing board and care home, existing integrated
service facility, or any combination thereof) is economically
viable; and
``(C) the applicable requirements for certificates,
studies, and statements of section 232 (for the existing
nursing home, existing assisted living facility, intermediate
care facility, board and care home, existing integrated
service facility or any combination thereof, proposed to be
purchased) or of section 242 (for the existing hospital
proposed to be purchased) have been met.''.
SEC. 502. NEW INTEGRATED SERVICE FACILITIES.
Section 232 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715w)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``are not acutely ill
and'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``nevertheless''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) The development of integrated service facilities for
the care and treatment of the elderly and other persons in
need of health care and related services, but who do not
require hospital care, and the support of health care
facilities which provide such health care and related
services (including those that support hospitals (as defined
in section 242(b))).'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``acutely ill and not'';
(B) in paragraph (4), by inserting after the second period
the following: ``Such term includes a parity first mortgage
or parity first deed of trust, subject to such terms and
conditions as the Secretary may provide.'';
[[Page S5249]]
(C) in paragraph (6)--
(i) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following:
``(A) meets all applicable licensing and regulatory
requirements of the State, or if there is no State law
providing for such licensing and regulation by the State,
meets all applicable licensing and regulatory requirements of
the municipality or other political subdivision in which the
facility is located, or, in the absence of any such
requirements, meets any underwriting requirements of the
Secretary for such purposes;''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(D) in paragraph (7), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(E) by adding at the end the following:
``(8) the term `integrated service facility' means a
facility--
``(A) providing integrated health care delivery services
designed and operated to provide medical, convalescent,
skilled and intermediate nursing, board and care services,
assisted living, rehabilitation, custodial, personal care
services, or any combination thereof, to sick, injured,
disabled, elderly, or infirm persons, or providing services
for the prevention of illness, or any combination thereof;
``(B) designed, in whole or in part, to provide a continuum
of care, as determined by the Secretary, for the sick,
injured, disabled, elderly, or infirm;
``(C) providing clinical services, outpatient services,
including community health services and medical practice
facilities and group practice facilities, to sick, injured,
disabled, elderly, or infirm persons not in need of the
services rendered in other facilities insurable under this
title, or for the prevention of illness, or any combination
thereof; or
``(D)(i) designed, in whole or in part to provide
supportive or ancillary services to hospitals (as defined in
section 242(b)), which services may include services provided
by special use health care facilities, professional office
buildings, laboratories, administrative offices, and other
facilities supportive or ancillary to health care delivery by
such hospitals; and
``(ii) that meet standards acceptable to the Secretary,
which may include standards governing licensure or State or
local approval and regulation of a mortgagor; or
``(E) that provides any combination of the services under
subparagraphs (A) through (D).'';
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
(i) by inserting ``board and care home,'' after
``rehabilitated nursing home,'';
(ii) by inserting ``integrated service facility,'' after
``assisted living facility,'' the first 2 places it appears;
(iii) by inserting ``board and care home,'' after
``existing nursing home,''; and
(iv) by striking ``or a board and care home'' and inserting
``, board and care home or integrated service facility'';
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting
before ``, including'' the following: ``or a public body,
public agency, or public corporation eligible under this
section''; and
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``energy conservation
measures'' and all that follows through ``95-619)'' and
inserting ``energy conserving improvements (as defined in
section 2(a))''.
(C) in paragraph (4)(A)--
(i) in the first sentence--
(I) by inserting ``, and integrated service facilities that
include such nursing home and intermediate care facilities,''
before ``, the Secretary'';
(II) by striking ``or section 1521 of the Public Health
Service Act'' and inserting ``of the Public Health Service
Act, or other applicable Federal law (or, in the absence of
applicable Federal law, by the Secretary),'';
(III) by inserting ``, or the portion of an integrated
service facility providing such services,'' before ``covered
by the mortgage,''; and
(IV) by inserting ``or for such nursing or intermediate
care services within an integrated service facility'' before
``, and (ii)'';
(ii) in the second sentence, by inserting ``(which may be
within an integrated service facility)'' after ``home and
facility'';
(iii) in the third sentence--
(I) by striking ``mortgage under this section'' and all
that follows through ``feasibility'' and inserting the
following: ``such mortgage under this section unless (i) the
proposed mortgagor or applicant for the mortgage insurance
for the home or facility or combined home or facility, or the
integrated service facility containing such services, has
commissioned and paid for the preparation of an independent
study of market need for the project'';
(II) in clause (i)(II), by striking ``and its relationship
to, other health care facilities and'' and inserting ``or
such facilities within an integrated service facility, and
its relationship to, other facilities providing health
care'';
(III) in clause (i)(IV), by striking ``in the event the
State does not prepare the study,''; and
(IV) in clause (i)(IV), by striking ``the State or''; and
(V) in clause (ii), by striking ``or section 1521 of the
Public Health Service Act'' and inserting ``of the Public
Health Service Act, or other applicable Federal law (or, in
the absence of applicable Federal law, by the Secretary),'';
(iv) by striking the penultimate sentence and inserting the
following: ``A study commissioned or undertaken by the State
in which the facility will be located shall be considered to
satisfy such market study requirement. The proposed mortgagor
or applicant may reimburse the State for the cost of an
independent study referred to in the preceding sentence.'';
and
(v) in the last sentence--
(I) by inserting ``the proposed mortgagor or applicant for
mortgage insurance may obtain from'' after ``10
individuals,'';
(II) by striking ``may'' and inserting ``and''; and
(III) by inserting a comma before ``written support''; and
(D) in paragraph (4)(C)(iii), by striking ``the appropriate
State'' and inserting ``any appropriate''; and
(4) in subsection (i)(1), by inserting ``integrated service
facilities,'' after ``assisted living facilities,''.
SEC. 503. HOSPITALS AND HOSPITAL-BASED INTEGRATED SERVICE
FACILITIES.
Section 242 of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 1715z-7)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by adding ``and'' at the end;
(ii) by striking subparagraph (B); and
(iii) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B)
and striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``respectfully'' and all
that follows through the period at the end and inserting
``given such terms in section 207(a), except that the term
`mortgage' shall include a parity first mortgage or parity
first deed of trust, subject to such terms and conditions as
the Secretary may provide; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) the term `integrated service facility' has the
meaning given the term in section 232(b).'';
(2) in subsection (c), by striking ``title VII of'' and
inserting ``title VI of'';
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting
after ``operation,'' the following: ``or that covers an
integrated service facility owned or to be owned by an
applicant or proposed mortgagor that also owns a hospital in
the same market area, including equipment to be used in its
operation,'';
(B) in paragraph (1)--
(i) in the first sentence, by inserting before the period
at the end the following: ``and who, in the case of a
mortgage covering an integrated service facility, is also the
owner of a hospital facility''; and
(ii) by adding at the end the following: ``A mortgage
insured hereunder covering an integrated service facility may
only cover the real and personal property where the eligible
facility will be located.'';
(C) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting ``or integrated
service facility'' before the comma; and
(D) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``energy conservation
measures'' and all that follows through ``95-619)'' and
inserting ``energy conserving improvements (as defined in
section 2(a))'';
(E) in paragraph (4)--
(i) in the first sentence--
(I) by inserting ``for a hospital'' after ``any mortgage'';
and
(II) by striking ``or section 1521 of the Public Health
Service Act'' and inserting ``of the Public Health Service
Act, or other applicable Federal law (or, in the absence of
applicable Federal law, by the Secretary),'';
(ii) by striking the third sentence and inserting the
following: ``If no such State agency exists, or if the State
agency exists but is not empowered to provide a certification
that there is a need for the hospital as set forth in
subparagraph (A) of the first sentence, the Secretary shall
not insure any such mortgage under this section unless: (A)
the proposed mortgagor or applicant for the hospital has
commissioned and paid for the preparation of an independent
study of market need for the proposed project that: (i) is
prepared in accordance with the principles established by the
Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and
Human Services (to the extent the Secretary of Housing and
Urban Development considers appropriate); (ii) assesses, on a
marketwide basis, the impact of the proposed hospital on, and
its relationship to, other facilities providing health care
services, the percentage of excess beds, demographic
projections, alternative health care delivery systems, and
the reimbursement structure of the hospital; (iii) is
addressed to and is acceptable to the Secretary in form and
substance; and (iv) is prepared by a financial consultant
selected by the proposed mortgagor or applicant and approved
by the Secretary; and (B) the State complies with the other
provisions of this paragraph that would otherwise be required
to be met by a State agency designated in accordance with
section 604(a)(1) of the Public Health Service Act, or other
applicable Federal law (or, in the absence of applicable
Federal law, by the Secretary). A study commissioned or
undertaken by the State in which the hospital will be located
shall be considered to satisfy such market study
requirement.''; and
(iii) in the last sentence, by striking ``feasibility'';
and
(4) in subsection (f), by inserting ``and public integrated
service facilities'' after ``public hospitals''.
[[Page S5250]]
SEC. 504. HOME EQUITY CONVERSION MORTGAGES.
(a) In General.--Section 255 of the National Housing Act
(12 U.S.C. 1715z-20) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (k) as subsection (l); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (j) the following:
``(k) Insurance Authority for Refinancings.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary may, upon application by a
mortgagee, insure under this subsection any mortgage given to
refinance an existing home equity conversion mortgage insured
under this section.
``(2) Anti-churning disclosure.--The Secretary shall, by
regulation, require that the mortgagee of a mortgage insured
under this subsection, provide to the mortgagor, within an
appropriate time period and in a manner established in such
regulations, a good faith estimate of--
``(A) the total cost of the refinancing; and
``(B) the increase in the mortgagor's principal limit as
measured by the estimated initial principal limit on the
mortgage to be insured under this subsection less the current
principal limit on the home equity conversion mortgage that
is being refinanced and insured under this subsection.
``(3) Waiver of counseling requirement.--The mortgagor
under a mortgage insured under this subsection may waive the
applicability, with respect to such mortgage, of the
requirements under subsection (d)(2)(B) (relating to third
party counseling), but only if--
``(A) the mortgagor has received the disclosure required
under paragraph (2);
``(B) the increase in the principal limit described in
paragraph (2) exceeds the amount of the total cost of
refinancing (as described in such paragraph) by an amount to
be determined by the Secretary; and
``(C) the time between the closing of the original home
equity conversion mortgage that is refinanced through the
mortgage insured under this subsection and the application
for a refinancing mortgage insured under this subsection does
not exceed 5 years.
``(4) Credit for premiums paid.--Notwithstanding section
203(c)(2)(A), the Secretary may reduce the amount of the
single premium payment otherwise collected under such section
at the time of the insurance of a mortgage refinanced and
insured under this subsection. The amount of the single
premium for mortgages refinanced under this subsection shall
be determined by the Secretary based on an actuarial study
conducted by the Secretary.
``(5) Fees.--The Secretary may establish a limit on the
origination fee that may be charged to a mortgagor under a
mortgage insured under this subsection, except that such
limitation shall provide that the origination fee may be
fully financed with the mortgage and shall include any fees
paid to correspondent mortgagees approved by the Secretary.
The Secretary shall prohibit the charging of any broker fees
in connection with mortgages insured under this
subsection.''.
(b) Regulations.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding sections 2 and 3 of this
Act, the Secretary shall issue any final regulations
necessary to implement the amendments made by subsection (a)
of this section, which shall take effect not later than the
expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of
enactment of this Act.
(2) Procedure.--The regulations under this subsection shall
be issued after notice and opportunity for public comment in
accordance with the procedure under section 553 of title 5,
United States Code, applicable to substantive rules
(notwithstanding subsections (a)(2), (b)(B), and (d)(3) of
such section).
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today, along with my colleagues, Senators
Santorum and Sarbanes, I am introducing legislation which will help
address the lack of affordable housing for the most vulnerable
Americans--the elderly, disabled persons, and low-income families. This
bill closes a number of gaps in the federal housing assistance programs
for these families, and ensures that programs designed to promote
affordable housing can do so in this rapidly expanding economy.
As our economy flourishes at an unprecedented rate, many Americans
have prospered. However, as the economy grows, so too does the gap
between rich and poor. Instead of finding opportunities in this new
economy, some Americans have found closed doors. This is especially
true for low-income people who are being squeezed out of tight housing
markets in my home state of Massachusetts and around the Nation.
Although a majority of elderly Americans live in decent, adequate and
affordable housing, millions of elderly households require some
assistance in order to afford housing that meets their needs. In fact,
there are eight elderly people waiting for each unit of assisted
elderly housing in this country. Fourteen percent of people in
Massachusetts are over 65 years of age, and one out of every ten of
these elderly persons has an income below the poverty level.
This bill expands upon the current program of providing affordable
housing, increasing housing opportunities for low-income elderly and
disabled persons, and bringing the program up-to-date. As Americans
grow older, housing programs must be altered to address the changing
needs of a generation that is living longer, and aging in place. This
bill enables existing housing to be converted to assisted living
facilities to meet the needs of the elderly and disabled.
Assisted living is the fastest growing type of elderly housing in the
U.S., and this legislation ensures that this supportive, and
increasingly necessary living arrangement, is available to all elderly
and disabled Americans, regardless of income. By 2030, 20 percent of
this Nation's population will be over the age of 65, compared with only
13 percent of the population today. As we make strides in medicine to
allow older people to live longer, more active lives, we must also make
sure that the services and structures are in place to support elderly
Americans. This bill is a step in this direction.
This bill also encourages the leveraging of federal funds, helping to
increase the stock of affordable housing. Public dollars alone are
unable to meet the needs of low-income families. This legislation makes
it easier for federal funds for disabled and elderly housing to be
combined with other sources of funding, including the Low-Income
Housing Tax Credit, and private funds.
Not only will this bill increase the supply of affordable housing for
the elderly and disabled, it will help to preserve affordable housing
for all low-income households. A record high number of households, 5.4
million, have worst case housing needs, paying over 50 percent of their
income to housing costs or living in substandard housing. This is a 12
percent increase since 1991. At the same time that more Americans are
finding it increasingly difficult to find suitable and affordable
housing, the federal government has not been doing enough to preserve
the affordable housing that exists.
A number of provisions aim to ensure that affordable housing is
preserved. This bill allows uninsured 236 project owners to retain
their excess income for use in the project, helping to keep these
owners in the program and ensuring that the units will remain
affordable. In addition, this bill includes the preservation bill
introduced earlier this Congress by Senator Jeffords and myself, S.
1318, to provide matching grants to States and localities devoting
resources to the preservation of affordable housing. Cities, like
Boston, which have dedicated a substantial amount of funds to the
production and preservation of affordable housing units, would receive
federal funds to assist in their efforts under this provision, ensuring
that an even greater number of units are preserved.
I hope that this critical legislation will attract broad support. At
this time of prosperity, we cannot forget that while many Americans
have benefited, there are still too many people who cannot afford to
meet their basic housing needs. These people cannot be overlooked in
this era of economic growth. This legislation ensures that they won't
be.
Mr. SARBANES. Mr President, I come to the floor today in support of
the Affordable Housing for Seniors and Families Act introduced by
Senators Kerry and Santorum.
This bill expands upon critical housing programs for both elderly and
disabled Americans. The Nation's population of elderly is growing
rapidly. Between 1980 and 1997, the number of people over the age of 65
grew by 33 percent. AARP estimates that by 2030, 20 percent of the
population will be over 65 years of age, compared to only 13 percent of
the population today. We need to have programs in place to assist
growing numbers of seniors.
AARP also estimates that there will be 2.8 million elderly people
who, by 2020, will have difficulty performing a number of basic
functions such as eating, bathing, and dressing. As American's age,
traditional housing will have to change to accommodate the unique needs
of those in their golden years. This bill will ensure that additional
housing opportunities exist where these Americans can receive the
services they need. This legislation allows
[[Page S5251]]
traditional elderly and disabled housing to be converted to assisted
living facilities, to meet these growing needs.
We must not only work to ensure that adequate services are available,
we must work to increase the affordable housing stock. A recent study
conducted by HUD indicates that 1.7 million low-income elderly are in
urgent need of affordable housing. Nearly 7.4 million elderly
households pay more than they can afford on housing, and there are more
than eight elderly people waiting for every unit of assisted elderly
housing.
In addition, HUD estimates that 1.4 million disabled Americans have
worst case housing needs, meaning they pay over half of their income
for housing or live in substandard housing. The Consortium for Persons
with Disabilities conducted a study in 1998 which showed that there was
not one housing market in the U.S. where a disabled person receiving
SSI benefits could afford rent based on federal guidelines.
The federal government is not doing enough to meet the needs of these
low-income people. This legislation assists us in meeting these needs.
It expands access to capital from both federal and non-federal sources
for elderly and disabled housing programs, helping to create new
housing opportunities for these communities. Providers of elderly and
disabled housing will be able to link with the Low-Income Housing Tax
Credit, a crucial source of affordable housing funding, and other
private funds.
This bill also ensures that the affordable housing which exists in
this country is maintained. This crucial stock of housing will be
preserved through a matching grant preservation program authored by our
colleagues, Senators Kerry and Jeffords, which will reward States and
localities spending resources to preserve affordable housing by giving
them federal dollars to assist in their efforts. This provision will
help to ensure that as we increase the stock of affordable housing on
the front end, we are not losing units on the back end--our goal is to
increase available housing, not maintain the status quo.
This bill is a step in the right direction towards providing
necessary housing opportunities for those Americans that are too often
forgotten. And many people in this nation enjoy the benefits of a
prospering economy, so too are many Americans being left behind. This
legislation will ensure that more Americans have the opportunity to
live in safe and decent housing.
______
By Mr. FITZGERALD:
S. 2734. A bill to amend the United States Warehouse Act to authorize
the issuance of electronic warehouse receipts, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
the Warehouse Improvement Act of 2000
Mr. FITZGERALD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce
legislation to revitalize and streamline the federal program governing
agricultural commodity warehouses. This legislation, entitled the
``Warehouse Improvement Act of 2000,'' will make U.S. agriculture more
competitive in foreign markets through efficiencies and cost savings
provided by today's computer technology and information management
systems.
The Warehouse Act was originally enacted in 1916, and was
subsequently amended in 1919, 1923, and 1931. However, since that time,
the authorizing legislation for this program has seen little change. At
the same time, U.S. agriculture and our society has seen drastic
changes since the early part of the 20th century. Computer technology
has revolutionized our world and laptops and handheld computers have
become almost commonplace. Now is the time for us to bring USDA's
agricultural warehouse program out of the dark ages and into the
information age.
The U.S. Warehouse Act does not mandate participation by warehouse
operators that it regulates; it simply offers those who apply and
qualify for licenses an alternative to state regulation. Currently,
warehouse licenses may be issued for the storage of cotton, grain,
tobacco, wool, dry beans, nuts, syrup and cottonseed. According to the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, 45.5 percent of the U.S. off-farm grain
and rice storage capacity and 49.5 percent of the total cotton storage
capacity is licensed under the Warehouse Act. In general, these paper
warehouse receipts that are issued under the Warehouse Act are
documents of title and represent ownership of the stored commodity.
The Warehouse Improvement Act of 2000 will make this program more
relevant to today's agricultural marketing system. The legislation
would authorize and standardize electronic documents and allow their
transfer from buyer to seller across state and international
boundaries. This new paperless flow of agricultural commodities from
farm gate to end-user would provide significant savings and
efficiencies for farmers across the Nation.
In 1992, the Congress directed the Secretary of Agriculture to
establish electronic warehouse receipts for only the cotton industry.
Since that time participation in the electronic-based program has grown
to over half of the U.S. cotton crop. In 1996, for example, nearly 12
million bales of cotton, out of the total crop of approximately 19
million bales, were represented by electronic warehouse receipts.
Recently, the cotton industry estimated that this electronic system
saves them 5 to 15 dollars per bale, a savings of over $275 million per
year. The legislation that I introduce today extends this electronic
warehouse receipt program to all agricultural commodities covered by
the U.S. Warehouse Act. This reduced paperwork, increased efficiency,
and substantial time savings will certainly make U.S. agriculture more
competitive in world markets, giving our U.S. farmers the upper hand.
In the short year and a half I have served in the U.S. Senate, I have
introduced two bills that have been delivered to the President's desk
to help bring the United States Department of Agriculture into the
information age. First, S. 1733, the Electronic Benefit Transfer
Interoperability and portability Act of 2000, which improves the
electronic benefits transfer system that has provided significant
savings and efficiency to the food stamp program, was signed into law
on February 11 of this year (P.L. 106-171). And second, S. 777, the
Freedom to E-File Act, requires USDA to set up a system to allow
farmers to file all USDA required paperwork over the internet. This
legislation unanimously passed both the House and Senate recently and
is currently awaiting the President's signature. The legislation I am
introducing today follows these two pieces of legislation by requiring
USDA to use computer technology and information management systems to
better serve farmers and the American public.
The Warehouse Improvement Act of 2000 is a positive step toward
moving the Department of Agriculture from the computer technology
``dirt road'' to the information superhighway of the 21st century. It
is common sense legislation and I look forward to working with my
colleagues on this issue as the legislative session moves forward. I
would also like to thank a number of the Senate Agriculture Committee
staff who have worked tirelessly on this issue, including Michael Knipe
and Bob White on Senator Lugar's staff and Terry Van Doren on my staff.
They have worked to build consensus among the USDA and the agricultural
industry to bring about these needed changes to improve the efficiency
of our grain marketing system. In fact, this legislation enjoys the
support of USDA, the Association of American Warehouse Control
Officials, the National Grain and Feed Association, the American Far
Bureau Federation, and various other commodity groups.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record
following the conclusion of my remarks.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2734
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 ``Warehouse Improvement Act of
2000''.
SEC. 2. STORAGE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN WAREHOUSES.
The United States Warehouse Act (7 U.S.C. 241 et seq.) is
amended to read as follows:
``SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
``This Act may be cited as the `United States Warehouse
Act'.
``SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
``In this Act:
``(1) Agricultural product.--The term `agricultural
product' means an agricultural
[[Page S5252]]
commodity, as determined by the Secretary, including a
processed product of an agricultural commodity.
``(2) Approval.--The term `approval' means the consent
provided by the Secretary for a person to engage in an
activity authorized by this Act.
``(3) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the
Department of Agriculture.
``(4) Electronic document.--The term `electronic document'
means a document authorized under this Act generated, sent,
received, or stored by electronic, optical, or similar means,
including electronic data interchange, electronic mail,
telegram, telex, or telecopy.
``(5) Electronic receipt.--The term `electronic receipt'
means a receipt that is authorized by the Secretary to be
issued or transmitted under this Act in the form of an
electronic document.
``(6) Holder.--
``(A) In general.--The term `holder' means a person, as
defined by the Secretary, that has possession in fact or by
operation of law of a receipt or any electronic document.
``(B) Inclusion.--The term `holder' includes a person that
has possession of a receipt or electronic document as a
creditor of another person.
``(7) Person.--The term `person' means--
``(A) a person (as defined in section 1 of title 1, United
States Code);
``(B) a State; and
``(C) a political subdivision of a State.
``(8) Receipt.--The term `receipt' means a warehouse
receipt issued in accordance with this Act, including an
electronic receipt.
``(9) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.
``(10) Warehouse.--The term `warehouse' means a structure
or other approved storage facility, as determined by the
Secretary, in which any agricultural product may be stored or
handled for the purposes of interstate or foreign commerce.
``(11) Warehouse operator.--The term `warehouse operator'
means a person that is lawfully engaged in the business of
storing or handling agricultural products.
``SEC. 3. POWERS OF SECRETARY.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall have exclusive
power, jurisdiction, and authority, to the extent that this
Act applies, with respect to--
``(1) each warehouse operator licensed under this Act;
``(2) each person that has obtained an approval to engage
in an activity under this Act; and
``(3) each person claiming an interest in an agricultural
product by means of an electronic document or electronic
receipt subject to this Act.
``(b) Covered Agricultural Products.--The Secretary shall
specify, after an opportunity for notice and comment, those
agricultural products for which a warehouse license may be
issued under this Act.
``(c) Investigations.--The Secretary may investigate the
storing, warehousing, classifying according to grade and
otherwise, weighing, and certifying of agricultural products.
``(d) Inspections.--The Secretary may inspect or cause to
be inspected any person or warehouse licensed under this Act
and any warehouse for which a license is applied for under
this Act.
``(e) Suitability for Storage.--The Secretary may determine
whether a licensed warehouse, or a warehouse for which a
license is applied for under this Act, is suitable for the
proper storage of the agricultural product or products stored
or proposed for storage in the warehouse.
``(f) Classification.--The Secretary may classify a
licensed warehouse, or a warehouse for which a license is
applied for under this Act, in accordance with the ownership,
location, surroundings, capacity, conditions, and other
qualities of the warehouse and as to the kinds of licenses
issued or that may be issued for the warehouse under this
Act.
``(g) Warehouse Operator's Duties.--Subject to the other
provisions of this Act, the Secretary may prescribe the
duties of a warehouse operator operating a warehouse licensed
under this Act with respect to the warehouse operator's care
of and responsibility for agricultural products stored or
handled by the warehouse operator.
``(h) Systems for Conveyance of Title in Agricultural
Products.--The Secretary may approve 1 or more systems under
which title in agricultural products may be conveyed and
under which documents relating to the shipment, payment, and
financing of the sale of agricultural products may be
transferred, including conveyance of receipts and any other
written or electronic documents in accordance with a process
established by the Secretary.
``(i) Examination and Audits.--The Secretary may conduct an
examination, audit, or similar activity with respect to--
``(1) any person that is engaged in the business of storing
an agricultural product that is subject to this Act;
``(2) any State agency that regulates the storage of an
agricultural product by such a person; or
``(3) any commodity exchange with regulatory authority over
the storage of agricultural products that are subject to this
Act.
``(j) Licenses for Operation of Warehouses.--The Secretary
may issue to any warehouse operator a license for the
operation of a warehouse in accordance with this Act if--
``(1) the Secretary determines that the warehouse is
suitable for the proper storage of the agricultural product
or products stored or proposed for storage in the warehouse;
and
``(2) the warehouse operator agrees, as a condition of the
license, to comply with this Act (including regulations
promulgated under this Act).
``(k) Licensing of Other Persons.--
``(1) In general.--On presentation of satisfactory proof of
competency to carry out the activities described in this
paragraph, the Secretary may issue to any person a Federal
license--
``(A) to inspect any agricultural product stored or handled
in a warehouse subject to this Act;
``(B) to sample such an agricultural product;
``(C) to classify such an agricultural product according to
condition, grade, or other class and certify the condition,
grade, or other class of the agricultural product; or
``(D) to weigh such an agricultural product and certify the
weight of the agricultural product.
``(2) Condition.--As a condition of a license issued under
paragraph (1), the licensee shall agree to comply with this
Act (including regulations promulgated under this Act).
``(l) Examination of Books, Records, Papers, and
Accounts.--The Secretary may examine, using designated
officers, employees, or agents of the Department, all books,
records, papers, and accounts relating to activities subject
to this Act of--
``(1) a warehouse operator operating a warehouse licensed
under this Act;
``(2) a person operating a system for the electronic
recording and transfer of receipts and other documents
authorized by the Secretary; or
``(3) any other person issuing receipts or electronic
documents authorized by the Secretary under this Act.
``(m) Cooperation With States.--The Secretary may--
``(1) cooperate with officers and employees of a State who
administer or enforce State laws relating to warehouses,
warehouse operators, weighers, graders, inspectors, samplers,
or classifiers; and
``(2) enter into cooperative agreements with States to
perform activities authorized under this Act.
``SEC. 4. IMPOSITION AND COLLECTION OF FEES.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall charge, assess, and
cause to be collected fees to cover the costs of
administering this Act.
``(b) Rates.--The fees under this section shall be set at a
rate determined by the Secretary.
``(c) Treatment of Fees.--All fees collected under this
section shall be credited to the account that incurs the
costs of administering this Act and shall be available to the
Secretary without further appropriation and without fiscal
year limitation.
``(d) Interest.--Funds collected under this section may be
deposited in an interest bearing account with a financial
institution, and any interest earned on the account shall be
credited under subsection (c).
``(e) Efficiencies and Cost Effectiveness.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall seek to minimize the
fees established under this section by improving efficiencies
and reducing costs, including the efficient use of personnel
to the extent practicable and consistent with the effective
implementation of this Act.
``(2) Report.--The Secretary shall publish an annual report
on the actions taken by the Secretary to comply with
paragraph (1).
``SEC. 5. QUALITY AND VALUE STANDARDS.
``If standards for the evaluation or determination of the
quality or value of an agricultural product are not
established under another Federal law, the Secretary may
establish standards for the evaluation or determination of
the quality or value of the agricultural product under this
Act.
``SEC. 6. BONDING AND OTHER FINANCIAL ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS.
``(a) In General.--As a condition of receiving a license or
approval under this Act (including regulations promulgated
under this Act), the person applying for the license or
approval shall execute and file with the Secretary a bond, or
provide such other financial assurance as the Secretary
determines appropriate, to secure the person's performance of
the activities so licensed or approved.
``(b) Service of Process.--To qualify as a suitable bond or
other financial assurance under subsection (a), the surety,
sureties, or financial institution shall be subject to
service of process in suits on the bond or other financial
assurance in the State, district, or territory in which the
warehouse is located.
``(c) Additional Assurances.--If the Secretary determines
that a previously approved bond or other financial assurance
is insufficient, the Secretary may suspend or revoke the
license or approval covered by the bond or other financial
assurance if the person that filed the bond or other
financial assurance does not provide such additional bond or
other financial assurance as the Secretary determines
appropriate.
``(d) Third Party Actions.--Any person injured by the
breach of any obligation arising under this Act for which a
bond or other financial assurance has been obtained as
required by this section may sue with respect to the bond or
other financial assurance in a district court of the United
States to recover
[[Page S5253]]
the damages that the person sustained as a result of the
breach.
``SEC. 7. MAINTENANCE OF RECORDS.
``To facilitate the administration of this Act, the
following persons shall maintain such records and make such
reports, as the Secretary may by regulation require:
``(1) A warehouse operator that is licensed under this Act.
``(2) A person operating a system for the electronic
recording and transfer of receipts and other documents that
are authorized under this Act.
``(3) Any other person issuing receipts or electronic
documents that are authorized under this Act.
``SEC. 8. PRECLUSION OF LIABILITY.
``Nothing in this Act creates any liability with respect to
the Secretary or any officer, employee, or agent of the
Department in any case in which a warehouse operator or other
person authorized by the Secretary to carry out this Act
fails to perform a contractual obligation that is not subject
to this Act (including regulations promulgated under this
Act).
``SEC. 9. FAIR TREATMENT IN STORAGE OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS.
``(a) In General.--Subject to the capacity of a warehouse,
a warehouse operator shall deal, in a fair and reasonable
manner, with persons storing, or seeking to store, an
agricultural product in the warehouse if the agricultural
product--
``(1) is of the kind, type, and quality customarily stored
or handled in the area in which the warehouse is located;
``(2) is tendered to the warehouse operator in a suitable
condition for warehousing; and
``(3) is tendered in a manner that is consistent with the
ordinary and usual course of business.
``(b) Allocation.--Nothing in this section prohibits a
warehouse operator from entering into an agreement with a
depositor of an agricultural product to allocate available
storage space.
``SEC. 10. COMMINGLING OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS.
``(a) In General.--A warehouse operator may commingle
agricultural products in a manner approved by the Secretary.
``(b) Liability.--A warehouse operator shall be severally
liable to each depositor or holder for the care and
redelivery of the share of the depositor and holder of the
commingled agricultural product to the same extent and under
the same circumstances as if the agricultural products had
been stored separately.
``SEC. 11. TRANSFER OF STORED AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS.
``(a) In General.--In accordance with regulations
promulgated under this Act, a warehouse operator may transfer
a stored agricultural product from 1 warehouse to another
warehouse for continued storage.
``(b) Continued Duty.--The warehouse operator from which
agricultural products have been transferred under subsection
(a) shall deliver to the rightful owner of such products, on
request at the original warehouse, such products in the
quantity and of the kind, quality, and grade called for by
the receipt or other evidence of storage of the owner.
``SEC. 12. ISSUANCE OF RECEIPTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS.
``(a) In General.--Subject to subsections (b) and (c) and
except as otherwise provided in this Act, at the request of
the depositor of an agricultural product stored or handled in
a warehouse licensed under this Act, the warehouse operator
shall issue a receipt to the depositor as prescribed by the
Secretary.
``(b) Actual Storage Required.--A receipt may not be issued
under this section for an agricultural product unless the
agricultural product is actually stored in the warehouse at
the time of the issuance of the receipt.
``(c) Contents.--Each receipt issued for an agricultural
product stored or handled in a warehouse licensed under this
Act shall contain such information, for each agricultural
product covered by the receipt, as the Secretary may require
by regulation.
``(d) Prohibition on Additional Receipts or Other
Documents.--
``(1) Receipts.--While a receipt issued under this Act is
outstanding and uncanceled by the warehouse operator, no
other or further receipt may be issued for the same
agricultural product (or any portion of the same agricultural
product) represented by the outstanding receipt, except as
authorized by the Secretary.
``(2) Other documents.--If a written or electronic document
is recorded or transferred under this section, no other
similar document in any form shall be issued by any person
with respect to the same agricultural product represented by
the document, except as authorized by the Secretary.
``(e) Electronic Receipts and Electronic Documents.--Except
as provided in subsection (f) and notwithstanding any other
provision of Federal or State law:
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall promulgate
regulations to authorize the issuance of electronic receipts,
and the recording and transfer of electronic receipts and
other documents, in accordance with this subsection.
``(2) Systems for electronic recording and transfer.--
Electronic receipts and electronic documents issued with
respect to an agricultural product may be recorded in, and
transferred under, a system or systems maintained in 1 or
more locations.
``(3) Treatment of holder.--The person designated as a
holder of an electronic receipt or other electronic document
shall be considered, for the purposes of Federal and State
law, to be in possession of the receipt or document.
``(4) Security interests.--
``(A) Perfection of interest.--Any security interest
lawfully asserted by a person under any Federal or State law
with respect to an agricultural product that is the subject
of an electronic receipt, or an electronic document filed
under any system for electronic receipts or other electronic
documents issued or filed in accordance with this Act, may be
perfected only by recording the security interest in the
system in the manner specified by the regulations promulgated
under paragraph (1).
``(B) Effect of recordation.--The recordation by a person
of the person's security interest in any agricultural product
included in any system for electronic receipts or other
electronic documents issued or filed in accordance with this
Act shall, for the purposes of Federal and State law,
establish the security interest of the person.
``(C) Priority.--If more than 1 security interest exists in
an agricultural product covered by an electronic receipt, the
priority of the security interests shall be determined by the
applicable Federal or State law.
``(D) Encumbrances.--
``(i) Operators licensed under state law.--If a warehouse
operator licensed under State law elects to issue an
electronic receipt authorized under this subsection, a
security interest, lien, or other encumbrance may be recorded
on the electronic receipt under this subsection only if the
security interest, lien, or other encumbrance is--
``(I) authorized by State law to be included on a written
warehouse receipt; and
``(II) recorded in a manner prescribed by the Secretary.
``(ii) Other applications.--If a warehouse operator
licensed under this Act, or a warehouse operator not licensed
under State law, elects to issue an electronic receipt
authorized under this subsection, a security interest, lien,
or other encumbrance shall be recorded on the electronic
receipt in a manner prescribed by the Secretary.
``(5) Effect of purchase of receipt or document.--A person
purchasing an electronic receipt or electronic document shall
take possession of the agricultural product free and clear of
all liens, except those liens recorded in the system or
systems established under the regulations promulgated under
paragraph (1).
``(6) Acceptance.--
``(A) In general.--An electronic receipt issued, and an
electronic document transferred, in accordance with the
regulations promulgated under paragraph (1) shall be accepted
in any business, market, or financial transaction, whether
governed by Federal or State law.
``(B) No electronic receipt required.--A person shall not
be required to issue a receipt or document with respect to an
agricultural product in electronic format.
``(7) Legal effect.--Information created to comply with
this Act (including regulations promulgated under this Act)
shall not be denied legal effect, validity, or enforceability
on the ground that the information is generated, sent,
received, or stored by electronic or similar means.
``(8) Option for state licensed warehouse operators.--
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a State-
licensed warehouse operator not licensed under this Act may,
at the option of the warehouse operator, issue electronic
receipts and electronic documents in accordance with this
subsection.
``(9) Application.--This subsection shall not apply to a
warehouse operator that is licensed under State law to store
agricultural commodities in a warehouse in the State if the
warehouse operator elects--
``(A) not to issue electronic receipts authorized under
this subsection; or
``(B) to issue electronic receipts authorized under State
law.
``(f) Electronic Receipts and Electronic Documents for
Cotton.--
``(1) Authority.--
``(A) Central filing.--Notwithstanding any other provision
of Federal or State law, the Secretary, or the designated
representative of the Secretary, may provide that, in lieu of
issuing a receipt for cotton stored in a warehouse licensed
under this Act or in any other warehouse, the information
required to be included in a receipt (i) under this Act in
the case of a warehouse licensed under this Act or (ii) under
any applicable State law in the case of a warehouse not
licensed under this Act, shall be recorded instead in 1 or
more central filing systems maintained in 1 or more locations
in accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary.
``(B) Delivery of cotton.--Any record under subparagraph
(A) shall include a statement that the cotton shall be
delivered to a specified person or to the order of the
person.
``(C) Electronic transmission facilities between warehouses
and system.--
``(i) Nonapplicability to warehouses without facilities.--
This subsection and section 4 shall not apply to a warehouse
that does not have facilities to electronically transmit and
receive information to and from a central filing system under
this subsection.
``(ii) No requirement to obtain facilities.--Nothing in
this subsection requires a warehouse operator to obtain
facilities described in clause (i).
[[Page S5254]]
``(2) Recordation and enforcement of liens in central
filing system.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
Federal or State law:
``(A) Recordation.--The record of the possessory interests
of persons in cotton included in a central filing system
under this subsection--
``(i) shall be considered to be a receipt for the purposes
of this Act and State law; and
``(ii) shall establish the possessory interest of persons
in the cotton.
``(B) Enforcement.--
``(i) Possession of warehouse receipt.--Any person
designated as a holder of an electronic warehouse receipt
authorized under this subsection or section 4 shall, for the
purpose of perfecting the security interest of the person
under Federal or State law with respect to the cotton covered
by the warehouse receipt, be considered to be in possession
of the warehouse receipt.
``(ii) Priority of security interests.--If more than 1
security interest exists in the cotton represented by the
electronic warehouse receipt, the priority of the security
interests shall be determined by applicable Federal or State
law.
``(iii) Applicability.--This subsection is applicable to
electronic cotton warehouse receipts and any other security
interests covering cotton stored in a cotton warehouse,
regardless of whether the warehouse is licensed under this
Act.
``(3) Conditions for delivery on demand for cotton
stored.--A warehouse operator operating a warehouse covered
by this subsection, in the absence of a lawful excuse, shall,
without unnecessary delay, deliver the cotton stored in the
warehouse on demand made by the person named in the record in
the central filing system as the holder of the receipt
representing the cotton, if the demand is accompanied by--
``(A) an offer to satisfy the valid lien of a warehouse
operator, as determined by the Secretary; and
``(B) an offer to provide an acknowledgment in a central
filing system under this subsection, if requested by the
warehouse operator, that the cotton has been delivered.
``SEC. 13. CONDITIONS FOR DELIVERY OF AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS.
``(a) Prompt Delivery.--In the absence of a lawful excuse,
a warehouse operator shall, without unnecessary delay,
deliver the agricultural product stored or handled in the
warehouse on a demand made by--
``(1) the holder of the receipt for the agricultural
product; or
``(2) the person that deposited the product, if no receipt
has been issued.
``(b) Payment To Accompany Demand if Requested.--
``(1) In general.--Demand for delivery shall be accompanied
by payment of the accrued charges associated with the storage
of the agricultural product if requested by the warehouse
operator.
``(2) Special rule for cotton.--In the case of cotton
stored in a warehouse, the warehouse operator shall provide a
written request for payment of the accrued charges associated
with the storage of the cotton to the holder of the receipt
at the time at which demand for the delivery of the cotton is
made.
``(c) Surrender of Receipt.--When the holder of a receipt
requests delivery of an agricultural product covered by the
receipt, the holder shall surrender the receipt to the
warehouse operator, in the manner prescribed by the
Secretary, to obtain the agricultural product.
``(d) Cancellation of Receipt.--A warehouse operator shall
cancel each receipt returned to the warehouse operator upon
the delivery of the agricultural product for which the
receipt was issued.
``SEC. 14. SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSES.
``(a) In General.--After providing notice and an
opportunity for a hearing in accordance with this section,
the Secretary may suspend or revoke any license issued, or
approval for an activity provided, under this Act--
``(1) for a material violation of, or failure to comply,
with any provision of this Act (including regulations
promulgated under this Act); or
``(2) on the ground that unreasonable or exorbitant charges
have been imposed for services rendered.
``(b) Temporary Suspension.--The Secretary may temporarily
suspend a license or approval for an activity under this Act
prior to an opportunity for a hearing for any violation of,
or failure to comply with, any provision of this Act
(including regulations promulgated under this Act).
``(c) Authority To Conduct Hearings.--The agency within the
Department that is responsible for administering regulations
promulgated under this Act shall have exclusive authority to
conduct any hearing required under this section.
``(d) Judicial Review.--
``(1) Jurisdiction.--A final administrative determination
issued subsequent to a hearing may be reviewable only in a
district court of the United States.
``(2) Procedure.--The review shall be conducted in
accordance with the standards set forth in section 706(2) of
title 5, United States Code.
``SEC. 15. PUBLIC INFORMATION.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary may release to the public
the results of any investigation made or hearing conducted
under this Act, including the names, addresses, and locations
of all persons--
``(1) that have been licensed under this Act or that have
been approved to engage in an activity under this Act; and
``(2) with respect to which a license or approval has been
suspended or revoked under section 14, including the reasons
for the suspension or revocation.
``(b) Confidentiality.--Except as otherwise provided by
law, an officer, employee, or agent of the Department shall
not divulge confidential business information obtained during
a warehouse examination or other function performed as part
of the duties of the officer, employee, or agent under this
Act.
``SEC. 16. PENALTIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.
``(a) Civil Penalties.--If a person fails to comply with
any requirement of this Act (including regulations
promulgated under this Act), the Secretary may assess, on the
record after an opportunity for a hearing, a civil penalty--
``(1) of not more than $25,000 per violation, if an
agricultural product is not involved in the violation; or
``(2) of not more than 100 percent of the value of the
agricultural product, if an agricultural product is involved
in the violation.
``(b) Federal Jurisdiction.--A district court of the United
States shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any action
brought under this Act without regard to the amount in
controversy or the citizenship of the parties.
``(c) Arbitration.--Nothing in this Act prevents the
enforceability of an agreement to arbitrate that would
otherwise be enforceable under chapter 1 of title 9, United
States Code.
``SEC. 17. REGULATIONS.
``The Secretary shall promulgate such regulations as the
Secretary considers necessary to carry out this Act.
``SEC. 18. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATION.
``There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are
necessary to carry out this Act.''.
______
By Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Daschle, Mr.
Baucus, Mr. Kerrey, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Thomas,
Mr. Harkin, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Cochran, and Mrs.
Lincoln):
S. 2735. A bill to promote access to health care services in rural
areas; to the Committee on Finance.
health care access and rural equality act of 2000
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today, I rise to introduce the Health Care
Access and Rural Equality Act of 2000 (H-CARE).
This proposal is the result of a bipartisan and bicameral effort. I
am proud to be joined by several cosponsors, including Senators
Grassley, Daschle, Thomas, Harkin, Baucus, Kerrey, Jeffords,
Rockefeller, Roberts, Johnson, Lincoln, and Cochran. I would also like
to thank our House companions for joining me as supporters of this
proposal. In particular, would like to recognize Representatives Foley,
Pomeroy, Tanner, Nussle, McIntyre, Stenholm, Berry, and Lucas for their
efforts. Working together, I believe we are taking important steps
toward improving health care access in our rural communities.
Also, I would like to thank the National Rural Health Association,
the Federation of American Health Systems, and the College of American
Pathologists for their support of this effort.
Last year, we received information that 12 of my State's 35 rural
hospitals were in jeopardy of closing. In North Dakota, many areas do
not have hospitals within their county borders. This means that in some
areas of my State, many communities depend on having access to one
specific rural health care facility. If this facility were to close,
this would leave residents in these areas without access to vital
health care services.
We know that in many rural communities, Medicare patients make up the
majority of the typical rural hospitals' caseloads--in N.D., more than
70 percent of most rural hospitals' patients are covered by Medicare.
This means that Medicare funding and changes to the program greatly
impact our small, rural providers.
Unfortunately, while our rural facilities may serve a
disproportionate number of Medicare patients, they are often forced to
operate with merely half the reimbursement of their urban counterparts.
For example, Mercy Hospital in Devils Lake receives on average about
$4,200 for treating a patient with pneumonia. In New York City, we know
that some hospitals receive more than $8,500 for treating the same
illness. This disparity places our providers at a clear disadvantage.
Against the backdrop of this funding disparity, we know that rural
providers
[[Page S5255]]
were particularly hard hit by reductions in the Balanced Budget Act of
1997. Last year, N.D. hospitals were losing at minimum 7 percent on
every Medicare patient they serve. In some of our smaller communities,
hospital margins fell as low as negative 21 percent. How can our
hospitals be expected to survive at a 20 percent loss?
Recognizing the challenges that our communities were facing, I fought
hard last year to offer relief to our rural providers. I am happy to
say that the Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999 (BBRA) brought more
than $100 million to our ND providers--but we must do more.
Even though the BBRA improved the outlook for our hospitals, N.D.
facilities are still in financial trouble--they are still projected to
have negative 4.9 percent margins by 2002. Continued funding shortfalls
have made it, and will continue to make it, impossible for our smallest
rural hospitals to make needed building improvements; impossible for
them to provide patients access to updated technologies; and difficult
for them to competitively recruit and retain health care providers,
particularly to the most isolated, frontier areas.
For this reason, I rise to introduce H-CARE. This legislation offers
targeted relief to our most vulnerable rural providers, including: our
sole community, critical access, and Medicare dependent hospitals.
In particular, H-CARE would offer a full inflation update to all
rural hospitals. The BBA limited hospitals' inflation updates through
2002. This has meant that our providers have not been allowed to
receive payments that are in line with the costs they incur for serving
Medicare patients. H-CARE would close the gap on this funding
shortfall.
Also, H-CARE permanently extends the important Medicare dependent
hospital program, which is due to expire in 2006, and would offer these
providers more up-to-date funding. Currently, they are reimbursed based
on 1988 costs. As providers that serve at least a 60 percent Medicare
caseload, it is important that they receive appropriate Medicare
payments.
In addition, H-CARE addresses several flaws in last year's Medicare
add-back bill that have adversely impacted our rural providers. For
example, many rural hospitals entered the Critical Access Hospital
(CAH) program under the promise that they would receive adequate
resources to keep their doors open. The BBRA inadvertently limited
these hospitals' ability to receive funding for providing lab services
to their patients. H-CARE fixes this problem by ensuring CAHs once
again receive the funding they need to provide lab services.
For our sole community hospitals, H-CARE corrects an error in the
BBRA which excluded some of these hospitals from receiving higher
reimbursement rates based on more recent costs. H-CARE fixes this
mistake by letting all sole community hospitals receive more up-to-date
payments based on 1996 costs. This is particularly important for N.D.
since 29 of my state's 36 rural facilities are sole community
hospitals.
Lastly, H-CARE would establish a loan fund that rural facilities
could access to repair crumbling buildings or update their equipment--
eligible facilities could receive up to $5m to make repairs and an
extra $50,000 to help develop a capital improvement plan. H-CARE also
includes grants, in the amount of $50,000 per facility, that hospitals
could use to purchase new technology and train staff on using this
technology.
In summary, this year, I will fight to enact these and other measures
that are vital to improving our rural health care system. I urge my
colleagues to support this important effort.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues
today to support introduction of the Health Care Access and Rural
Equality Act of 2000, known as H-CARE.
I especially want to commend Senators Conrad and Grassley, and
Representative Foley for the tremendous amount of effort they put forth
in drafting this key legislation. As well, I commend a number of my
other colleagues who have contributed immensely to the crafting of this
bill, including Senators Daschle, Harkin, Roberts, Thomas, Kerrey,
Rockefeller, and Representatives Pomeroy, Tanner, Nussle, and McIntyre.
The bipartisan and bicameral support for this legislation signifies
the critical and often times desperate condition, that our rural
hospitals are in due in large part to the unforeseen impact of the
Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997 and disparities in Medicare
reimbursements for rural facilities.
Impact estimates and preliminary data suggest that the BBA cuts have
fallen squarely on the shoulders of our rural hospitals who do not have
the operating margins to shoulder consecutive years of budgetary
deficits. Unfortunately, rural hospitals do not have the luxury of
trimming spending in one area to meet the needs in another. Recent cuts
have forced hospitals to eliminate important programs such as home
health care or therapy services in order to operate within these tight
budget restraints.
Rural hospitals are charged with the responsibility to provide high-
quality, compassionate care to individuals in times of need, especially
our senior and disabled Medicare populations. However, it also seems
evident to me that we have asked hospitals to do a day's work for an
hour's pay.
The H-CARE Act works to restore some of the funding disparities that
exist for rural hospitals and provides resources to ensure their
survival.
Hospitals in my home state of South Dakota face a potential loss in
Medicare revenues of nearly $171 million over five years if something
is not done to help them.
Provisions in H-CARE including inflation updates for rural hospitals,
protection for Medicare Dependent Hospitals, support for the Critical
Access Hospitals Programs, creation of a capital infrastructure loan
program, assistance to update technology, and increased reimbursement
for Sole Community Hospitals will allow rural facilities the necessary
resources to keep their doors open.
We are talking about rural facilities such as the Medical Center in
Huron, SD, which was forced to eliminate 24 full time positions to
compensate for Medicare cuts in their FY 2001 budget, or the hospital
in Burke, SD, which had to cut $124,000 from their hospital this year
to ensure their survival. These are just a few examples of the many
stories that I've heard from hospitals administrators throughout my
home state of South Dakota.
Once again, I am please to join my colleagues today as an original
cosponsor of the H-CARE Act and look forward to working with the full
Senate to ensure quick and immediate action on this critically
important legislation.
______
By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself, and Mr. Bingaman):
S. 2736. A bill to provide compensation for victims of the fire
initiated by the National Park Service at Bandelier National Monument,
New Mexico; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
the cerro grande fire assistance act
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, let me say from the very beginning of
this discussion today, it has been a real pleasure to work with Senator
Bingaman and his staff--and I hope that is mutual--on putting together
a bill that we are going to introduce today. It is our best effort to
put together a bill that permits the citizens of Los Alamos, the people
who reside there, whose houses or personal property were damaged or
destroyed, and businesses that existed, owned either by corporations or
individuals--the damage they might have suffered. This is just a
partial list. I will read the list before we leave the floor.
This is an effort to compensate the Indian people for similar losses.
Mr. President, since May 4, 2000, it is now known that the National
Park Service started a forest fire, a so-called prescribed burn, at
Bandelier National Monument in New Mexico. That was done during the
height of the fire season and, regrettably, as everyone now knows, that
fire, which was expected to be a controlled burn by the Park Service in
Bandelier National Park, was not able to be controlled by those who
were called in to control it. The fire went right down the
mountainside, ended up burning down the forest and parts of the
community of Los Alamos. The fire destroyed more than 425 residences.
I am going to start from the beginning with just one photo. Senator
[[Page S5256]]
Bingaman has others. He drove the streets while some of the fires were
still cooling off. As I understand it, Senator Bingaman could see the
remnants of steam and heat, and the residue of fires that had not yet
totally burned out.
This is just one picture of the old town site. That means there is a
part of the area that was built up by the Federal Government years ago
when Los Alamos was a closed off and secret community, at which the
first atomic bomb was being built. All of the science was put in place
up there, and it was totally a secret city. Years later, while I was a
Senator--I have been here 28 years--we tore down the walls and sold
those houses to individuals.
This is the way the fire looked as a house burned adjoining the trees
and forests that surround Los Alamos. It was actually much worse than
that. But that is the best we can do in a photograph of this type.
The fire started on May 4, and by May 5 it was a full-fledged
wildfire devouring everything in its path. Ultimately, it devoured
48,000 acres of forest land and significant parts of the community
where houses and businesses were owned by individuals.
During the time this fire burned out of control, our Nation was
celebrating the 50th anniversary of Smokey the Bear; that is, the date
of his rescue from a raging forest fire in the Lincoln National Forest
in NM.
For 50 years, Smokey the Bear had cautioned Americans to be careful.
Apparently, no one told the Park Service.
The decision was made to start a forest fire. The basis was a
miscalculation of the danger. The result was, believe it or not, about
25,000 people were evacuated; 405 families lost their residences or
homes; two Indian pueblos lost land, livelihood, and sacred sites; and
48,000 acres were transformed from a lush forest into a charcoal garden
covered in some places by 12 inches of ash.
The cost thus far to taxpayers just to fight the fire is perhaps $10
million.
We now have a couple of official reports. We have a 40-page report
called ``Sierra Grande Prescribed Burn Investigative Report'' dated May
18, 2000. It can be summarized.
Too little planning; too few followed procedures; too little caution;
too little experience; too much dry underbrush; too much wind; too much
advice unheeded; and too late arrival of the ``hotshot'' experts; and,
it was too bad.
It is more than too bad. It calls into question the policy with
reference to prescribed burns. But that is an issue for another day.
But I am hopeful that serious discussions are taking place as to how we
should handle controlled burns in the future.
We have a catastrophe. It is a catastrophe that it started in the
first place. There is no doubt about that.
It is a tragedy that it destroyed homes. There is no doubt about
that.
It is a disaster that fire disrupted businesses. It cost State and
local governments millions of dollars. There is no disagreement about
that.
Imagine the horror of seeing your home reduced to ashes and the
freakishness of owning a concrete staircase to nowhere and calling it
your home as you come back to visit. The house is burned to the ground,
and only cement steps remain.
Imagine seeing your neighborhood reduced to a row of brick chimneys
and concrete foundations.
Consider the irony of a home burned to the ground while the wooden
tree house stands unoccupied in the yard.
Imagine the task of sifting through the ashes for any unincinerated
remnants of your life.
Think about the gawkers and the TV trucks driving through your
neighborhood waiting to see if the first rains produce mudslides and/or
floods.
Imagine your life if you were they.
You want to go back to work, to get the kids back into a routine, but
your life is a series of back-to-back-meetings, dealing with
appraisers, contractors, insurance, FEMA, SBA, and flood insurance.
Everyone involved wishes that the fire could be unset, the match
unlit, the decision unmade, but there is no way to undo the
catastrophe.
The Federal Government can't undo the damage, but it can provide
prompt compensation. That is the objective of the legislation that
Senator Bingaman and I are introducing today. We have worked closely
with the administration, and I am pleased that they support this
legislation.
I am pleased to introduce legislation that starts the process of
rebuilding lives. It provides an expedited settlement process for the
victims of the fire.
The first estimate of the cost that we are covering is an approximate
number of $300 million. We will use $300 million as our approximate
cost as we take this bill into conference on the MILCON bill and
attempt to get it adopted in an expedited matter as part of that
conference, along with the moneys needed to compensate the victims for
their claims under this legislation. And there are moneys for other
components of the fire under other federal programs--$134 million for
the laboratory damage itself, which is a separate appropriations item.
To accomplish the goal of compensating fire victims in the most
efficient and fair way possible, this legislation establishes a
compensation process through a separate Office of Cerro Grande Fire
Claims at FEMA.
It provides for full compensation for property losses and personal
injuries sustained by the victims, including all individuals,
regardless of their immigration status, small businesses, local
governments, schools, Indian tribes, and any other entities injured as
a result of the fire.
Such compensation will include the replacement cost of homes, cars,
and any other property lost or damaged in the fire, as well as lost
wages, business losses, insurance deductibles, emergency staffing
expenses, debris removal and other clean-up costs, and any other losses
deemed appropriate by the Director of FEMA.
To make sure that this is an expedited procedure, within 45 days of
enactment, FEMA must promulgate rules governing the claims process.
After the rules are in place, FEMA must publish in newspapers and other
places in New Mexico, an easy-to-understand description of the claims
process in English and Spanish, so that everyone will know their rights
and where and how to file a claim.
Once those rules are in place, victims will have 2 years to file
their claims, and FEMA must pay those claims within 6 months of filing.
During the adjudication of each claim, FEMA is authorized to make
interim payments to victims so that those with the greatest need will
not be forced to wait a long time before receiving some form of
compensation from the government.
This bill also will reimburse insurance companies for the costs they
paid to help rebuild Los Alamos and the surrounding communities. Under
this bill, insurance companies will be able to make subrogation claims
against the government on behalf of themselves or their policyholders
in same manner as any other victim of the fire.
I want the victims to know that this bill requires that they will
compensated before insurance companies.
The intent is to encourage insurance companies to settle with their
policyholders and then come to the government for compensation. That
way, victims can get on with their lives as soon as possible, and
insurance companies can get reimbursed through the claims process
without the need to proceed under the cumbersome Federal Tort Claims
Act.
For victims whose insurance will not cover the complete replacement
cost of their property loss or their personal injury, insurance
companies should cover all that is required under their policies, and
the government will make up the difference.
Mr. President, I think that in this bill, we have developed a process
which is fair, comprehensive, and efficient. Yet there will be some who
believe, for whatever reasons, that they are not receiving what they
are entitled from the government.
For those individuals, this bill preserves their right to sue under
the Tort Claims Act or to protest the final claims decision of FEMA. I
hope that there will be few, if any, such lawsuits, but I believe we
must maintain the rights of individuals to proceed to court if they are
unhappy with their claims award.
I think we have taken an excellent first step in proposing this
claims legislation. There is no way one bill can address every issue
which might arise in every circumstance. Many of the details will be
determined by the Fire
[[Page S5257]]
Claims Office. I want my constituents to know that I will do all I can
to monitor the process as it moves forward to ensure that New Mexicans
are treated fairly and in accordance with the intent of this law.
All our citizens owe a tremendous gratitude to the workers at Los
Alamos. We won the cold war because of their contributions. Today we
enjoy our freedoms because of their dedication. We need their continued
dedication to assure that those freedoms survive for our future
generations. And they need our help to rebuild their lives and return
to their vital missions.
I hope my colleagues will support the Cerro Grande Fire Assistance
Act.
Citizens can choose not to take this claims approach provided for in
this legislation, and they can go to the Federal courts under the
Federal Tort Claims Act. If they do, they will get no compensation
under this bill. That is their option.
If they choose the option provided under this bill and they go
through it to get money for their damages--let's just take an item,
such as a house which Senator Bingaman and I discussed. If there is a
dispute as to the value of that house, and they are supposed to get the
value for the replacement cost--if there is a dispute, this bill
provides an opportunity to use arbitration.
We have limited attorney's fees in this bill to 10 percent. We don't
think this is going to be a heavily litigated process. I repeat, if
citizens want to make their claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act,
this legislation does not preclude that, other than they have no right
to claim anything under this bill.
We owe tremendous gratitude to the workers of Los Alamos. We won the
cold war because of their efforts and their predecessors in the various
activities and scientific niches at this laboratory which has been run
admirably by the University of California.
Today, we enjoy some of our basic freedoms because in that cold war
with the Soviet Union we had great people in this community and a
couple of other communities, always staying ahead so people could be
assured nuclear weapons would never be used against our people.
That laboratory is having some trouble besides the fire. When it all
finishes, we will still stand in awe at the fantastic brain trust that
is assembled in the mountains of northern New Mexico. We have a sister
institution in California, obviously, and an engineering institution in
Albuquerque called Sandia National Laboratories. They are three labs
that are tied together by scientific prowess and a commitment to serve
America in her needs.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The junior Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague, Senator Domenici.
I also want to state how much I have enjoyed working with him on this
terrible subject. I think the ability of our offices to work together
has been admirable. We have come up with a plan that moves the process
forward and closer to some real relief for the people who were damaged
by this incident.
Mr. President, this was a disaster. This was a catastrophe. Let me
show three photos that make the case. This is a photo from space, from
a very high altitude, that shows the fire while it was burning, with
the smoke plume coming through northeastern New Mexico into Colorado,
into Oklahoma, and into west Texas. The photo shows the magnitude of
what was involved. This was clearly the largest forest fire we have
ever had in our State of New Mexico since they have been keeping
records. It is very unfortunate that it was started by a controlled
burn to which the Park Service agreed. That clearly makes this the
responsibility of the Federal Government. As a country, we need to step
up and compensate people for their losses.
Let me show two other photos that make the case as to what was done.
This is a photo of one of the houses in Los Alamos with a car out
front. These people in Los Alamos were advised they needed to leave
their homes, get in cars or on buses, and go down to Santa Fe to escape
the danger. They did. This is what they came back to a couple of weeks
later. Clearly, this is not the kind of a circumstance of which anyone
can be proud.
Mr. DOMENICI. Will the Senator yield?
Mr. BINGAMAN. I yield.
Mr. DOMENICI. The Senator views this scene while driving down the
streets?
Mr. BINGAMAN. I toured the community and the neighborhoods with James
Lee Witt, the head of FEMA, and with our Governor, Governor Johnson. We
saw the devastation.
Mr. DOMENICI. This is a chimney?
Mr. BINGAMAN. That is a chimney.
The people did not have time to even arrange to drive their cars out
of town. Of course, all their personal belongings were in the houses.
The damage was total. The loss was total for the families who were
burned out.
Another photo makes the case, a photo of the rubble that was left at
one of the sites. Here is a bicycle. I might add, the water lines in
these houses were still running. As we drove up and down the street, we
saw water spurting out of the water lines, but there would be no house.
Clearly, the devastation was enormous.
The people of Los Alamos and Senator Domenici made this point, and it
has been made many times: The people of Los Alamos were heroic in their
response to this tragedy. They pulled together as a community. They
helped each other. They worked together to get their community back up
and running. The people of the entire State came together and rallied
to help the people who were injured. This was a period, and we are
still in it to some extent, a period where we have lots of fires going
on in New Mexico. It was not just the people who were injured in the
Cerro Grande fire who were requiring assistance. We had other fires in
our State, including the Scott Able fire in southern New Mexico which
was very devastating, the fire at Ruidoso, the Viveash fire near Pecos.
Our job now, and what Senator Domenici and I are trying to do in this
legislation, is to put in place a mechanism so people can get as full a
relief as possible. We recognize you are not ever in a position to
compensate someone for all of this loss, but we want to compensate
people as fully as the Government can. We also, of course, want to do
so as quickly as possible.
The reason this legislation is important, I believe--and I think this
was something which the administration officials, and Jack Lew with the
Office of Management and Budget agreed with entirely--is that the time
it takes to go through the Tort Claims Act is extensive. History has
shown that in many cases it is not satisfactory, that process has not
been satisfactory. It was our conclusion, and the conclusion supported
by the administration, that we should do a separate bill which would
set up a different procedure that, hopefully, would give better
compensation to people, and do it much more quickly than is otherwise
possible.
Senator Domenici pointed out we have gone to great lengths to not
interfere with the right of people to pursue their remedies under
current law, if they choose to do that. We have not changed the rules
for that. We have not in any way impeded that. But people have to make
a judgment after they consult with everyone involved--their attorneys
if they have attorneys, or anyone else with whom they want to consult--
make a judgment as to whether to use the remedy, the process we are
setting up in this legislation, once this becomes law, or to use the
process that is available to them under current law under the Tort
Claims Act.
My own hope is that we have come up with a better alternative. That
is my belief. That has certainly been our purpose. We hope people will
see it that way and that this legislation will result in more full
compensation, much more rapidly than would otherwise be possible, and
that people will be able to get on with their lives because of that.
The legislation has many aspects to it, which I discussed in detail.
Senator Domenici went into some of that. Let me just say, the main
thrust of it is to compensate people for injuries they receive, for
loss of property, compensate businesses for losses they incurred,
compensate businesses and individuals, both, for financial losses that
are directly traceable and attributable to this fire.
Clearly, we want this to be a fair process for those involved. At the
same time, we are anxious that it be done in a responsible way, so once
it is over with, we can have an accounting for
[[Page S5258]]
what compensation was provided and the justification for it. I think
the American people will want that and should be entitled to that. I
believe this will substantially improve the chances of folks getting
fully compensated, as fully compensated as possible, as early as
possible.
For that reason, I am pleased to join Senator Domenici in
cosponsoring this legislation. I do think we have several steps,
several hoops to jump through between now and when this becomes law.
There will be opportunities for us to fine-tune this as we go forward.
I hope we can do that, but I hope we can go forward very quickly. He
indicated our desire to have it included in some appropriations
legislation--the military construction appropriations bill--which is
pending now. I hope very much that can happen, and I hope that bill can
get to the President very quickly with this included and can become
law.
Mr. President, on May 4, 2000, a decision by the National Park
Service to conduct a prescribed burn in the Bandelier National Park
changed the lives of Los Alamos residents forever. What started as a
prescribed burn of approximately 1,000 acres, turned into a fire that
roared for 18 days and in the end charred over 47,000 acres. Soon after
the fire raged out of control, the National Park Service assumed
responsibility for the damage caused by the fire.
While we need to take another look at the Park Service's policy
concerning prescribed burns, we first need to take care of those that
were injured by the Park Service's actions. There will be time for
hearings and investigations. But first, there are people that must be
clothed, homes that must be rebuilt, and businesses that must pay their
bills. We need to make sure our children are settled again before the
2001 school year begins in 2 months. We need to clean up the debris and
hazardous waste so families can think about rebuilding.
The Cerro Grande Fire Assistance Act that I am introducing with
Senator Domenici today is what we believe represents the Government's
responsibility to the citizens of Los Alamos and the surrounding
pueblos.
The Cerro Grande fire didn't just burn 47,000 acres of national
forest. This fire was so intense that it traveled several miles from
the point of origin to the town of Los Alamos, New Mexico. When the
fire roared up the canyons in Los Alamos, it completely destroyed 385
dwellings and seriously damaged another 17 dwellings. Over 60 homes
were burned on 46th, 48th and Yucca Streets alone. Keep in mind that
Los Alamos is not a large community and these numbers reflect a large
majority of the residents in those areas. This chart shows what used to
be single family homes on Arizona Avenue. It was one of the 50 homes
destroyed along Arizona Avenue.
This second picture shows the damage done along Alabama Avenue. The
fourplexes across the street were spared but many of the fourplexes
along Alabama are no longer standing. Most of these fourplexes were
built between 1949 and 1954 by the federal government for the first
workers of the national laboratory. In the late 1960's the federal
government sold these homes to the residents of Los Alamos. On May 4th,
many of these homes were occupied by the original residents--
individuals who are now retired from the lab and enjoying their golden
years. Ten percent of the households destroyed belonged to senior
citizens. One such couple showed up to a town meeting to show me all
they had left of their former home--the wife had the burned door handle
and the husband had the key in his pocket.
Other fourplexes that were destroyed were occupied by young families
and the most recent generation of lab employees. 35% of the housing
units destroyed were being rented and 92 of those tenants were without
any form of insurance. Many of these people are now without a home for
their young families. One of the couples I spoke with after the fire
was a young couple expecting a child who lost their home and their
adjoining rental unit. And I was recently informed that over 200 school
children were burned out of their homes.
Driving through these neighborhoods that are now filled with
blackened trees, melted swing sets and burned bicycles is a difficult
thing to witness. This fire grew out of control so quickly, mostly
because of the 60 mph winds that swirled through the controlled burn
area, that most families had less than an hour to gather their
belongings and evacuate the mesa. Many others didn't have even that
much time. As you can see by the numerous burned cars, many families
were unable to get both of their cars down the hill before the fire
hit. In the end, 5% of the housing units in Los Alamos was destroyed by
this fire.
Despite the personal tragedy many of them suffered, the residents of
Los Alamos came together and helped one another and supported the
efforts of the hundreds of firefighters who fought long and hard to
control this monstrous blaze. Several Los Alamos restaurant owners
returned to Los Alamos during the height of the fire and donated their
inventory and services to cook up meals at the local Elks Lodge for the
firefighters, police and National Guardsmen who were sent to this
remote community. In addition, the outpouring of support from the
nearby communities in setting up shelters and offering food and
clothing was something I was proud to witness firsthand. This support
also included the shelters and individuals who volunteered to take in
the hundreds of animals that belonged to the over 20,000 residents
evacuated from Los Alamos and White Rock.
The citizens of Los Alamos were heroic throughout this fire.
Residents, like engineer Tony Tomei, were single-handedly trying to
help save their neighborhoods from spreading wildlife. Tomei used his
garden hose to douse small spot fires and used a rake and shovel to
extinguish burning debris. His all night efforts saved his own house
and the house of one neighbor, much to the neighbor's surprise.
After returning from Los Alamos and viewing the extent of damage, I
began work with Senator Domenici on legislation that would compensate
the people of Los Alamos, the surrounding pueblos, and the national
laboratory for the damages sustained. We have been working for over 3
weeks now with the Office of Budget and Management, the White House,
and the citizens of New Mexico to come up with legislation that will
provide those who suffered personal and/or financial injury the most
expedient and thorough compensation possible. We have received input
from a number of individuals who lost their homes, from business owners
who were shut down for up to a week, from the Los Alamos County Council
and the governors of the San Ildefonso and Santa Clara Pueblos. While
no one can truly be made whole after such a devastating experience, the
role of the federal government in this situation is to ensure that
people are adequately compensated for the losses resulting from the
fire. Senator Domenici and I worked to come up with legislation that
would compensate New Mexicans as fully as possible, while still being
something acceptable to the entire Congress.
Based on the numerous meetings we held with the people mentioned
above, we have come up with categories of damages that are compensable,
including: property losses, business losses and financial losses. The
goal is to compensate individuals for losses that were not otherwise
covered by insurance or any other third party contribution.
For example, compensable property losses will include such things as
uninsured property losses. This should address the problem many
individuals are facing after realizing that they were under insured for
their homes or their personal property. The goal is this legislation is
to provide individuals with the funds needed to repair or replace their
real and personal property using ``replacement value'' as a determining
factor. This means that individuals should receive the dollar amount
needed to rebuild their homes using current construction methods
and materials, in line with current zoning requirements, and without a
deduction for depreciation. It also means that individuals should be
provided with the funds necessary to allow them to replace their
damaged personal property with property that provides them equal
utility. Moreover, we realize that homeowners will need funds to cover
the cost of stabilizing and restoring their land to a condition
suitable for building after the debris is removed.
[[Page S5259]]
The legislation will also compensate public entities for the damage
to the physical infrastructure in the community. The county and other
governmental entities will be able to seek compensation for the cost of
rebuilding community infrastructure damaged by the fire, such as power
lines, roads and public parks.
Compensable business losses will include such things as damage to
tangible business assets, lost profits, costs incurred as a result of
suspending business for one week, wages paid to employees for days
missed during the fire, and other business losses deemed appropriate by
the Claims Office. This provision is intended to help business owners
who were forced to evacuate Los Alamos for up to 5 days. For people
like the local nursery owner, closing shop during Mothers' Day weekend
and the short planting season in northern NM was devastating. While the
residents of Los Alamos disappeared from the community, the fixed
overhead costs of the small business owners did not disappear.
Compensable financial losses will include economic losses for
expenses such as insurance deductibles, temporary living expenses,
relocation expenses, debris removal costs, and emergency staffing
expenses for our governmental entities. The intent is to assist victims
in rebuilding and recovering incidental expenses that they would
otherwise not have incurred, had it not been for the Cerro Grande Fire.
This includes costs incurred by the claimant in proving his losses,
including the cost of appraisals where necessary.
In addition, the pueblos will be eligible to seek compensation for
the damage to the forest lands on the pueblo and the impact of the fire
on their subsistence hunting, fishing, firewood, timbering, grazing and
agricultural activities. Individual tribal members and wholly-owned
tribal entities will be eligible to seek reimbursement through this
claims process for quantifiable losses. This means that the BIA will
not serve as a conduit for any settlement to an individual tribal
member or a tribe.
This legislation also intends to provide resources for the
remediation that will be necessary to prevent future disasters because
of flooding and mudslides. While we have experienced an unusually dry
summer in the Southwest, forecasters predict an earlier than usual
monsoon season and efforts must be made to shore up the burned
hillsides and 70 foot canyon walls. The remediation effort will have to
be undertaken by several federal agencies, including the Department of
interior, the Agriculture Department and other entities with experience
in this regard.
In order to expedite an individual's recovery, we have designed an
administrative claims process that will allow injured parties to seek
compensation for the expenses that were incurred, and were not
otherwise covered by a third party, as a result of the Cerro Grande
fire. This legislation authorizes that claims process and establishes
an Office of Cerro Grande Fire Claims which will be under the authority
of the Director of FEMA. FEMA is directed to compensate the victims of
the Cerro Grande fire for injuries resulting from the fire and to
settle those claims in an expeditious manner. FEMA will be given
authority to hire an independent claims manager or other experts in
claims processing to oversee this large project. We feel that FEMA is
the best federal agency to handle this responsibility as they are
capable of the task and are familiar with the damages that are common
in a disaster. I trust that the FEMA Director will assemble a team that
the community of Los Alamos can have confidence in and that will strive
to settle claims to the benefit of those injured.
The Director of FEMA has 45 days to design this claims process and
promulgate regulations for the claims office to follow. The regulations
should not be overly burdensome for the claimants and should provide an
understandable and straight forward path to settlement. In the event
that issues arise concerning a settlement amount, the claimant will be
able to enter into binding arbitration to settle any disputes with the
claims office. If a claimant would rather have the Director's decision
reviewed by a judge, the claimant will be able to seek judicial review
of the Director's decision in federal court. Claimants who believe they
need legal assistance as they proceed through this process should know
that attorneys' fees are provided for in this legislation, with a cap
of 10%. And while we believe this administrative claims process is the
most efficient and reliable route for those seeking compensation, we
are leaving the option of a federal tort action open to this
legislation.
Mr. President, there is nothing Senator Domenici or I can do to
replace the personal items and sentimental possessions that were
consumed by the Cerro Grande Fire. This federal compensation will do
nothing to replace a coin collection collected over a lifetime or an
heirloom inherited from a great-grandmother. However, the federal
government has the responsibility to try and restore the lives of the
people impacted by this horrible tragedy. The federal government
started this mess and it is time the federal government started
cleaning up this mess and fixing what was damaged.
Congress can start the recovery process by passing this legislation.
I ask that my colleagues act quickly on this legislation as the season
for rebuilding this community is a short season for this city that sits
high above the valley. I thank my colleagues for their support and for
their willingness to do the right thing in this very unique situation.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The senior Senator from New Mexico.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I once again thank Senator Bingaman.
Part of the time these discussions were taking place in New Mexico, I
was not available to be there. As most people in New Mexico know, I
have been there twice, but I missed one occasion when Senator Bingaman
got to talk with the people. I thank him for that because he brought
back a number of ideas. One of my staffers was present with him. Those
ideas are incorporated in this legislation.
In particular, let me repeat that the bill covers ``loss of
property,'' and it says what that means; ``business losses,'' and it
says what that means; ``financial losses,'' and it says what that
means. Then a ``summary of the claims process'' and a summary of the
remedies and a summary of appeal rights.
The lead agency is going to be the Office of Cerro Grande Fire Claims
within FEMA. James Lee Witt or his successor will oversee that office
but has the discretionary authority to designate an independent claims
manager to run the office, if he so desires.
We are not creating anything new, it will be FEMA. But if he wants an
independent claims manager, he has the latitude and authority to do
that. There will be a separate account for the victims of the Cerro
Grande fire that will be separate from the disaster assistance fund.
Also, all of the money appropriated will be designated as an emergency.
I want to thank the staff who worked on this legislation. In my
office: Steve Bell, Denise Greenlaw Ramonas, Brian Benczkowski, James
Fuller and Veronica Rodriguez. From Senator Bingaman's office, Trudy
Vincent, Christine Landavazo, Sam Fowler and Bob Simon. I also want to
thank Ann Bushmiller from the White House Counsel's office and
Elizabeth Gore from the Office of Management and Budget. I ask
unanimous consent that a letter from Jack Lew expressing the
Administration's support be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 2736
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 ``Cerro Grande Fire Assistance
Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) on May 4, 2000, the National Park Service initiated a
prescribed burn on Federal land at Bandelier National
Monument in New Mexico during the peak of the fire season in
the Southwest;
(2) on May 5, 2000, the prescribed burn, which became known
as the ``Cerro Grande Prescribed Fire'', exceeded the
containment capabilities of the National Park Service, was
reclassified as a wildland burn, and spread to other Federal
and non-Federal land, quickly becoming characterized as a
wildfire;
(3) by May 7, 2000, the fire had grown in size and caused
evacuations in and around
[[Page S5260]]
Los Alamos, New Mexico, including the Los Alamos National
Laboratory, 1 of the leading national research laboratories
in the United States and the birthplace of the atomic bomb;
(4) on May 13, 2000, the President issued a major disaster
declaration for the counties of Bernalillo, Cibola, Los
Alamos, McKinley, Mora, Rio Arriba, Sandoval, San Juan, San
Miguel, Santa Fe, Taos, and Torrance, New Mexico;
(5) the fire resulted in the loss of Federal, State, local,
tribal, and private property;
(6) the Secretary of the Interior and the National Park
Service have assumed responsibility for the fire and
subsequent losses of property; and
(7) the United States should compensate the victims of the
Cerro Grande fire.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to compensate victims of the fire at Cerro Grande, New
Mexico, for injuries resulting from the fire; and
(2) to provide for the expeditious consideration and
settlement of claims for those injuries.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Cerro grande fire.--The term ``Cerro Grande fire''
means the fire resulting from the initiation by the National
Park Service of a prescribed burn at Bandelier National
Monument, New Mexico, on May 4, 2000.
(2) Director.--The term ``Director'' means--
(A) the Director of the Federal Emergency Management
Agency; or
(B) if a Manager is appointed under section 4(a)(3), the
Manager.
(3) Injured person.--The term ``injured person'' means--
(A) an individual, regardless of the citizenship or alien
status of the individual; or
(B) an Indian tribe, corporation, tribal corporation,
partnership, company, association, county, township, city,
State, school district, or other non-Federal entity
(including a legal representative);
that suffered injury resulting from the Cerro Grande fire.
(4) Injury.--The term ``injury'' has the same meaning as
the term ``injury or loss of property, or personal injury or
death'' as used in section 1346(b)(1) of title 28, United
States Code.
(5) Manager.--The term ``Manager'' means an Independent
Claims Manager appointed under section 4(a)(3).
(6) Office.--The term ``Office'' means the Office of Cerro
Grande Fire Claims established by section 4(a)(2).
SEC. 4. COMPENSATION FOR VICTIMS OF CERRO GRANDE FIRE.
(a) In General.--
(1) Compensation.--Each injured person shall be entitled to
receive from the United States compensation for injury
suffered by the injured person as a result of the Cerro
Grande fire.
(2) Office of cerro grande fire claims.--
(A) In general.--There is established within the Federal
Emergency Management Agency an Office of Cerro Grande Fire
Claims.
(B) Purpose.--The Office shall receive, process, and pay
claims in accordance with this title.
(C) Funding.--The Office--
(i) shall be funded from funds made available to the
Director under this title; and
(ii) may reimburse other Federal agencies for claims
processing support and assistance.
(3) Option to appoint independent claims manager.--The
Director may appoint an Independent Claims Manager to--
(A) head the Office; and
(B) assume the duties of the Director under this Act.
(b) Submission of Claims.--Not later than 2 years after the
date on which regulations are first promulgated under
subsection (f), an injured person may submit to the Director
a written claim for 1 or more injuries suffered by the
injured person in accordance with such requirements as the
Director determines to be appropriate.
(c) Investigation of Claims.--
(1) In general.--The Director shall, on behalf of the
United States, investigate, consider, ascertain, adjust,
determine, grant, deny, or settle any claim for money damages
asserted under subsection (b).
(2) Applicability of state law.--Except as otherwise
provided in this Act, the laws of the State of New Mexico
shall apply to the calculation of damages under subsection
(d)(4).
(3) Extent of damages.--Any payment under this Act--
(A) shall be limited to actual compensatory damages
measured by injuries suffered; and
(B) shall not include--
(i) interest before settlement or payment of a claim; or
(ii) punitive damages.
(d) Payment of Claims.--
(1) Determination and payment of amount.--
(A) In general.--
(i) Payment.--Not later than 180 days after the date on
which a claim is submitted under this Act, the Director shall
determine and fix the amount, if any, to be paid for the
claim.
(ii) Priority.--The Director, to the maximum extent
practicable, shall pay subrogation claims submitted under
this Act only after paying claims submitted by injured
parties that are not insurance companies seeking payment as
subrogees.
(B) Parameters of determination.--In determining and
settling a claim under this Act, the Director shall determine
only--
(i) whether the claimant is an injured person;
(ii) whether the injury that is the subject of the claim
resulted from the fire;
(iii) the amount, if any, to be allowed and paid under this
Act; and
(iv) the person or persons entitled to receive the amount.
(C) Insurance and other benefits.--
(i) In general.--In determining the amount of, and paying,
a claim under this Act, to prevent recovery by a claimant in
excess of actual compensatory damages, the Director shall
reduce the amount to be paid for the claim by an amount that
is equal to the total of insurance benefits (excluding life
insurance benefits) or other payments or settlements of any
nature that were paid, or will be paid, with respect to the
claim.
(ii) Government loans.--This subparagraph shall not apply
to the receipt by a claimant of any government loan that is
required to be repaid by the claimant.
(2) Partial payment.--
(A) In general.--At the request of a claimant, the Director
may make 1 or more advance or partial payments before the
final settlement of a claim, including final settlement on
any portion or aspect of a claim that is determined to be
severable.
(B) Judicial decision.--If a claimant receives a partial
payment on a claim under this Act, but further payment on the
claim is subsequently denied by the Director, the claimant
may--
(i) seek judicial review under subsection (i); and
(ii) keep any partial payment that the claimant received,
unless the Director determines that the claimant--
(I) was not eligible to receive the compensation; or
(II) fraudulently procured the compensation.
(3) Rights of insurer or other third party.--If an insurer
or other third party pays any amount to a claimant to
compensate for an injury described in subsection (a), the
insurer or other third party shall be subrogated to any right
that the claimant has to receive any payment under this Act
or any other law.
(4) Allowable damages.--
(A) Loss of property.--A claim that is paid for loss of
property under this Act may include otherwise uncompensated
damages resulting from the Cerro Grande fire for--
(i) an uninsured or underinsured property loss;
(ii) a decrease in the value of real property;
(iii) damage to physical infrastructure;
(iv) a cost resulting from lost tribal subsistence from
hunting, fishing, firewood gathering, timbering, grazing, or
agricultural activities conducted on land damaged by the
Cerro Grande fire;
(v) a cost of reforestation or revegetation on tribal or
non-Federal land, to the extent that the cost of
reforestation or revegetation is not covered by any other
Federal program; and
(vi) any other loss that the Director determines to be
appropriate for inclusion as loss of property.
(B) Business loss.--A claim that is paid for injury under
this Act may include damages resulting from the Cerro Grande
fire for the following types of otherwise uncompensated
business loss:
(i) Damage to tangible assets or inventory.
(ii) Business interruption losses.
(iii) Overhead costs.
(iv) Employee wages for work not performed.
(v) Any other loss that the Director determines to be
appropriate for inclusion as business loss.
(C) Financial loss.--A claim that is paid for injury under
this Act may include damages resulting from the Cerro Grande
fire for the following types of otherwise uncompensated
financial loss:
(i) Increased mortgage interest costs.
(ii) An insurance deductible.
(iii) A temporary living or relocation expense.
(iv) Lost wages or personal income.
(v) Emergency staffing expenses.
(vi) Debris removal and other cleanup costs.
(vii) Costs of reasonable efforts, as determined by the
Director, to reduce the risk of wildfire, flood, or other
natural disaster in the counties specified in section
2(a)(4), to risk levels prevailing in those counties before
the Cerro Grande fire, that are incurred not later than the
date that is 3 years after the date on which the regulations
under subsection (f) are first promulgated.
(viii) A premium for flood insurance that is required to be
paid on or before May 12, 2002, if, as a result of the Cerro
Grande fire, a person that was not required to purchase flood
insurance before the Cerro Grande fire is required to
purchase flood insurance.
(ix) Any other loss that the Director determines to be
appropriate for inclusion as financial loss.
(e) Acceptance of Award.--The acceptance by a claimant of
any payment under this Act, except an advance or partial
payment made under subsection (d)(2), shall--
(1) be final and conclusive on the claimant, with respect
to all claims arising out of or relating to the same subject
matter; and
(2) constitute a complete release of all claims against the
United States (including any agency or employee of the United
[[Page S5261]]
States) under chapter 171 of title 28, United States Code
(commonly known as the ``Federal Tort Claims Act''), or any
other Federal or State law, arising out of or relating to the
same subject matter.
(f) Regulations and Public Information.--
(1) Regulations.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, not later than 45 days after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Director shall promulgate and publish in the
Federal Register interim final regulations for the processing
and payment of claims under this Act.
(2) Public information.--
(A) In general.--At the time at which the Director
promulgates regulations under paragraph (1), the Director
shall publish, in newspapers of general circulation in the
State of New Mexico, a clear, concise, and easily
understandable explanation, in English and Spanish, of--
(i) the rights conferred under this Act; and
(ii) the procedural and other requirements of the
regulations promulgated under paragraph (1).
(B) Dissemination through other media.--The Director shall
disseminate the explanation published under subparagraph (A)
through brochures, pamphlets, radio, television, and other
media that the Director determines are likely to reach
prospective claimants.
(g) Consultation.--In administering this Act, the Director
shall consult with the Secretary of the Interior, the
Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Agriculture, the
Administrator of the Small Business Administration, other
Federal agencies, and State, local, and tribal authorities,
as determined to be necessary by the Director to--
(1) ensure the efficient administration of the claims
process; and
(2) provide for local concerns.
(h) Election of Remedy.--
(1) In general.--An injured person may elect to seek
compensation from the United States for 1 or more injuries
resulting from the Cerro Grande fire by--
(A) submitting a claim under this Act;
(B) filing a claim or bringing a civil action under chapter
171 of title 28, United States Code; or
(C) bringing an authorized civil action under any other
provision of law.
(2) Effect of election.--An election by an injured person
to seek compensation in any manner described in paragraph (1)
shall be final and conclusive on the claimant with respect to
all injuries resulting from the Cerro Grande fire that are
suffered by the claimant.
(3) Arbitration.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 45 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Director shall establish by
regulation procedures under which a dispute regarding a claim
submitted under this Act may be settled by arbitration.
(B) Arbitration as remedy.--On establishment of arbitration
procedures under subparagraph (A), an injured person that
submits a disputed claim under this Act may elect to settle
the claim through arbitration.
(C) Binding effect.--An election by an injured person to
settle a claim through arbitration under this paragraph
shall--
(i) be binding; and
(ii) preclude any exercise by the injured person of the
right to judicial review of a claim described in subsection
(i).
(4) No effect on entitlements.--Nothing in this Act affects
any right of a claimant to file a claim for benefits under
any Federal entitlement program.
(i) Judicial Review.--
(1) In general.--Any claimant aggrieved by a final decision
of the Director under this Act may, not later than 60 days
after the date on which the decision is issued, bring a civil
action in the United States District Court for the District
of New Mexico, to modify or set aside the decision, in whole
or in part.
(2) Record.--The court shall hear a civil action under
paragraph (1) on the record made before the Director.
(3) Standard.--The decision of the Director incorporating
the findings of the Director shall be upheld if the decision
is supported by substantial evidence on the record considered
as a whole.
(j) Attorney's and Agent's Fees.--
(1) In general.--No attorney or agent, acting alone or in
combination with any other attorney or agent, shall charge,
demand, receive, or collect, for services rendered in
connection with a claim submitted under this Act, fees in
excess of 10 percent of the amount of any payment on the
claim.
(2) Violation.--An attorney or agent who violates paragraph
(1) shall be fined not more than $10,000.
(k) Waiver of Requirement for Matching Funds.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
law, a State or local project that is determined by the
Director to be carried out in response to the Cerro Grande
fire under any Federal program that applies to an area
affected by the Cerro Grande fire shall not be subject to any
requirement for State or local matching funds to pay the cost
of the project under the Federal program.
(2) Federal share.--The Federal share of the costs of a
project described in paragraph (1) shall be 100 percent.
(l) Applicability of Debt Collection Requirements.--Section
3716 of title 31, United States Code, shall not apply to any
payment under this Act.
(m) Indian Compensation.--Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, in the case of an Indian tribe, a tribal
entity, or a member of an Indian tribe that submits a claim
under this Act--
(1) the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall have no authority
over, or any trust obligation regarding, any aspect of the
submission of, or any payment received for, the claim;
(2) the Indian tribe, tribal entity, or member of an Indian
tribe shall be entitled to proceed under this Act in the same
manner and to the same extent as any other injured person;
and
(3) except with respect to land damaged by the Cerro Grande
fire that is the subject of the claim, the Bureau of Indian
Affairs shall have no responsibility to restore land damaged
by the Cerro Grande fire.
(n) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
promulgation of regulations under subsection (f)(1), and
annually thereafter, the Director shall submit to Congress a
report that describes the claims submitted under this Act
during the year preceding the date of submission of the
report, including, for each claim--
(1) the amount claimed;
(2) a brief description of the nature of the claim; and
(3) the status or disposition of the claim, including the
amount of any payment under this Act.
(o) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this Act.
____
Summary of Cerro Grande Fire Assistance Act of 2000
Administrator: FEMA as lead agency, with authority to
designate an independent claims manager.
Entities eligible for compensation: all individuals, Indian
tribes, corporations, tribal corporations, partnerships,
companies, associations, counties, townships, cities, State,
school districts and any other non-federal entity that
suffered injury resulting from the Cero Grande fire.
Types of compensable injuries: tracks the Federal Tort
Claims Act: Injury, loss of property and personal injuries
are compensable.
Damages for ``loss of property'' will include: uninsured or
under-insured property loss, decrease in the value of real
property, damage to physical infrastructure, loss of
subsistence hunting, fishing, firewood, timbering, grazing
and agricultural activities, and any other loss deemed
appropriate as a ``loss of property.''
Damages for ``injury'' will include ``business losses'',
such as: damage to tangible assets or inventory, business
interruption losses, overhead costs, employee wages paid for
work not performed as a result of the fire, and any other
injury deemed appropriate for compensation as a ``business
loss.''
Damages for ``injury will include ``financial losses'' such
as: increased mortgage interest costs, insurance deductibles,
the cost of flood insurance, temporary living or relocation
expenses, emergency staffing expenses, debris removal and
other clean-up costs, hazard mitigation and any other injury
deemed appropriate for compensation as a ``financial loss.''
Process: FEMA Director required to promulgate interim final
regulations within 45 days of enactment of the Act. Claims
must be filed within two years of promulgation of the
regulations, and adjudicated by FEMA within 180 days of
filing. Once regulations are promulgated, Director must
publish easy-to-understand explanation of the rights
conferred by the law and a description of the claims process
in English and Spanish in New Mexico newspapers and other
media outlets.
Election of remedies: Party must at the outset elect either
to proceed under Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) or
legislative claims process. The election is binding on the
claimant for all damages resulting from the Cerro Grande
fire. Must release U.S. Government from lawsuit under FTCA as
a condition of receiving a claims process award.
Appeal: If victim is dissatisfied with claims decision, may
appeal to Federal District Court for the District of New
Mexico or pursue binding arbitration. If elect binding
arbitration, decision of the arbitor is final. If elect
Federal Court, standard of review is that the decision of the
Director stands if supported by substantial evidence on the
record.
Insurance: Insurance companies allowed to proceed in same
manner under the Act as all other claimants, but to the
maximum extent practicable, insurance company subrogation
claims must be paid after those of other injured persons.
Awards received through claims process will be reduced by
amounts of insurance payments already received.
Consultation: Director required to consult with Secretary
of Energy, Secretary of Interior, Secretary of Agriculture,
SBA, FEMA, other federal agencies, State, local and tribal
officials to ensure the efficient administration of the
process and provide an outlet for local concerns.
Attorney's fees: Limited to 10 percent of claims award.
Attorneys who violate the rule fined $10,000.
Matching requirements: Waives State and local matching
requirement for all Federal programs utilized in response to
the fire.
Flood insurance: Government will reimburse homeowners for
the cost of three years of Federal flood insurance premiums
if their property was not in the flood plain prior to the
fire and subsequently was included in the flood plain as a
result of the fire.
[[Page S5262]]
____
Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC, June 15, 2000.
Hon. Pete V. Domenici,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Domenici: As you know from our work together
in recent weeks, the Administration shares with you the
commitment to ensuring that all those affected by the fire
that began at Bandelier National Monument are fully
compensated for their losses. We are pleased that our work
together in a constructive dialogue has resulted in
legislation that will achieve this goal.
We are fully supportive of the Cerro Grande Fire Assistance
Act, which will help fully, fairly, and quickly compensate
those who have suffered losses as a result of this fire. We
urge Congress to move promptly to pass this essential
legislation.
Sincerely,
Jacob J. Lew,
Director.
______
By Mr. LUGAR (for himself and Mr. Harkin)
S. 2737. A bill to amend the United States Grain Standards Act to
extend the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to collect fees,
extend the authorization of appropriations, and improve the
administration of that Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
the grain standards improvement act of 2000
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce the Grain
Standards Improvement Act of 2000. I am pleased that the ranking
minority member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, Senator Harkin,
has joined me as a cosponsor.
The United States Grain Standards Act was enacted in 1916 as a means
of eliminating confusion resulting from the use of many different sets
of grain standards applied by different grain inspection organizations
operating without national coordination and supervision. Created by
this Act and operating within the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA), the Federal Grain Inspection Service (FGIS) sets
and administers official grain standards and conducts grain inspection
services.
The Act authorizes FGIS to establish standards of ``kind, class,
quality and condition for corn, wheat, rye, oats, barley, flax seed,
sorghum, soybeans, mixed grain and such other grains as in the
administrator's judgment the usages of the trade may warrant and
permit.'' The FGIS administrator is authorized to develop standards or
procedures for accurate weighing and weight certification and controls
for grain shipped in interstate or foreign commerce. The Act also
established certain performance requirements for grain inspection and
weighing equipment. The certainty of these standards and the
credibility and integrity of the inspection system has allowed our
domestic and international markets to flourish as a result.
But improvements are necessary to keep up with the changing markets.
The legislation that I am introducing today is based on legislation
proposed by the Administration earlier this year. The Gain Standards
Improvement Act of 2000 will reauthorize the collection of fees, the
FGIS Advisory Committee, and funding for FGIS until September 30, 2005.
In order to keep up with advances in technology, FGIS needs
flexibility in the way that commodity samples can be obtained. Grain
marketing patterns, quality attributes, and quality testing methods are
changing rapidly. New quality traits developed through biotechnology
have increased the speed of change. This Act will provide flexibility
needed by FGIS to continue to maintain an efficient sampling system.
In general, under current law, only one official federal inspection
agency can operate within geographic boundaries. The 1993 amendments to
the Grain Standards Act provided for a pilot program that allowed for
more than one official inspection agency within a single geographic
area at interior locations. These programs were successful in
facilitating the marketing of grain without jeopardizing the integrity
of the system. This bill will permanently authorize this policy.
This legislation is supported by the National Association of State
Departments of Agriculture, the Association of American Warehouse
Control Officials, the National Grain and Feed Association, the
American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Farmers Union and other
agricultural commodity organizations.
The credibility and integrity of the United States grain inspection
must be maintained to allow U.S. producers to continue to feed the
world through our marketing system. The Grain Standards Improvement Act
of 2000 will help FGIS to continue these high standards and increase
the economic efficiency of the U.S. grain marketing system.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill and a section-
by-section summary be printed in the Record following my statement.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 2737
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 ``Grain Standards Improvement
Act of 2000''.
SEC. 2. SAMPLING FOR EXPORT GRAIN.
Section 5(a)(1) of the United States Grain Standards Act (7
U.S.C. 77(a)(1)) is amended by striking ``(on the basis'' and
all that follows through ``from the United States)''.
SEC. 3. GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES FOR OFFICIAL AGENCIES.
(a) Inspection Authority.--Section 7(f)(2) of the United
States Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 79(f)(2)) is amended by
striking ``conduct pilot programs to''.
(b) Weighing Authority.--Section 7A(i) of the United States
Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 79a(i)) is amended in the last
sentence by striking ``conduct pilot programs to''.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION TO COLLECT FEES.
(a) Inspection and Supervisory Fees.--Section 7(j)(4) of
the United States Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 79(j)(4)) is
amended in the first sentence by striking ``2000'' and
inserting ``2005''.
(b) Weighing and Supervisory Fees.--Section 7A(l)(3) of the
United States Grain Standards Act (7 U.S.C. 79a(l)(3)) is
amended in the first sentence by striking ``2000'' and
inserting ``2005''.
SEC. 5. TESTING OF EQUIPMENT.
Section 7B(a) of the United States Grain Standards Act (7
U.S.C. 79b(a)) is amended in the first sentence by striking
``but at least annually and''.
SEC. 6. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPERVISORY COSTS.
Section 7D of the United States Grain Standards Act (7
U.S.C. 79d) is amended--
(1) by striking ``2000'' and inserting ``2005''; and
(2) by striking ``40 per centum'' and inserting ``30
percent''.
SEC. 7. LICENSES AND AUTHORIZATIONS.
Section 8(a)(3) of the United States Grain Standards Act (7
U.S.C. 84(a)(3)) is amended by inserting ``inspection,
weighing,'' after ``laboratory testing,''.
SEC. 8. GRAIN ADDITIVES.
Section 13(e)(1) of the United States Grain Standards Act
(7 U.S.C. 87b(e)(1)) is amended by inserting ``, or prohibit
disguising the quality of grain,'' after ``sound and pure
grain''.
SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
Section 19 of the United States Grain Standards Act (7
U.S.C. 87h) is amended by striking ``2000'' and inserting
``2005''.
SEC. 10. ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
Section 21(e) of the United States Grain Standards Act (7
U.S.C. 87j(e)) is amended by striking ``2000'' and inserting
``2005''.
____
Grain Standards Improvement Act of 2000--Section-by-Section Summary
Section 1. Short title
This Act may be cited as the Grain Standards Improvement
Act of 2000.
Section 2. Sampling for export grain
This section would provide FGIS with more flexibility in
obtaining samples of export grain. Currently, samples of
export grain can only be obtained after final elevation of
the grain. Historically, this has been a requirement due to
the breakage that can occur as the grain goes through an
export elevator. In many cases, this sampling procedure is
still appropriate. However, for value enhanced traits (e.g.
protein) that are not affected by handling, sampling and
testing prior to final elevation may be more appropriate.
Often it is not a simple process to perform these tests in a
field environment. Grain marketing patterns, quality
attributes, and quality testing methods are changing rapidly.
These changes are being expedited by quality traits developed
through biotechnology and new testing methods. In response to
these breakthroughs, new grain marketing programs are
evolving that require measurement of additional, more complex
quality attributes. Also, in order to maintain an efficient
and effective marketing system in the United States, grain
merchants are relying more on identity preserved programs to
assure acceptable quality with limited testing. These
merchants may need quality results on identity preserved
grain prior to final elevation. Flexibility in obtaining
samples would not jeopardize the representatives of the
samples obtained for inspection.
Section 3. Geographic boundaries for official agencies
This section would allow, under certain conditions, more
than one official agency to
[[Page S5263]]
perform inspection and weighing services within a single
geographic area at interior locations. The 1993 amendments
provided for pilot programs to test such a change. These
programs were successful in that they facilitated the
marketing of grain without jeopardizing integrity of the
system. This section will give the Secretary the authority to
develop criteria similar to the current pilot programs.
Section 4. Authorization to collect fees
This section would extend, through fiscal year 2005, the
authority of the Secretary to charge user fees assessed for
the supervision of official agencies and to invest sums
collected.
Section 5. Testing of equipment
This section would eliminate the requirement for mandatory
annual testing for all equipment used in sampling, grading,
inspection, and weighing. Annual testing is not necessary or
appropriate for such equipment.
Section 6. Limitation on administration and supervisory costs
This section would provide that the administration and
supervisory costs for services, performed through fiscal year
2005, would be subject to the ceiling of 30 percent of total
costs for such services (excluding the costs of
standardization, compliance, and foreign monitoring
activities).
Section 7. Licenses and authorizations
This section would allow the Secretary to contract for
inspection and weighing services in addition to specified
sampling and technical functions. This allows the Secretary
greater flexibility in performing the duties required by the
Act.
Section 8. Grain additives
This section would prohibit disguising the quality of the
grain as a result of the introduction of nongrain substances
and other identified grains. The prohibition would include
the introduction of nongrain substances such as cinnamon,
vanilla, and bleach, and could apply to all grain whether
officially inspected or not. This prohibition will enhance
the integrity of the national grain marketing system.
Section 9. Authorization of appropriations
The section would extend, through fiscal year 2005, the
authorization for appropriations to cover standardization,
compliance, foreign monitoring activities and any other
expenses necessary to carry out the provisions of the Act
which are not obtained from fees and sales of samples.
Section 10. Advisory committee
This section would maintain an advisory committee through
fiscal year 2005. This committee represents the industry and
advises the Secretary in administering the Act.
______
By Mr. JEFFORDS (for himself, Mr. Frist, and Mr. Enzi):
S. 2738. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to reduce
medical mistakes and medication-related errors; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
the patient safety and errors reduction act
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join today with my good
friend Senator Frist to announce the introduction of the Patient Safety
and Errors Reduction Act, a bill which will work toward increasing
patient safety for all Americans.
Late last year, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) released a report
citing medical errors as the eighth leading cause of death in the
United States, with as many as 98,000 people dying as a result each
year. More people die of medical mistakes than from motor vehicle
accidents, AIDS, or breast cancer. The IOM report took a serious look
at the problem of medical errors and provided some thoughtful
recommendations for change.
Last year I worked closely with Senator Frist to ensure that Congress
pass Senate Bill 580, the Healthcare Research and Quality Act of 1999.
This newly passed legislation reauthorized by the Agency for Health
Care Policy and Research, renamed it the Agency for Healthcare Research
and Quality (AHRQ), and refocused its mission to support healthcare
research on safety and quality improvement. I am pleased that AHRQ has
decided to dedicate more than $20 million for research on medical error
reduction. This shows a real commitment by Dr. John Eisenberg and his
agency to address the problem of medical errors.
Our bill will attack this problem in several ways. First, it will
provide a framework of support for the numerous efforts that are
already underway in the public and the private sectors. Second, it will
establish a Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety within
the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. And finally, it will
provide needed confidentiality protections for medical error reporting
systems.
I believe we can save thousands of lives by substantially reducing
medical mistakes over the next few years. We have a great opportunity
to apply the safety lessons that we have already learned--both within
health care and in other fields.
How can we prevent these mistakes? One lesson we have learned that
was repeated time and again in our hearings is that mandatory reporting
of all errors and subsequent punishment of healthcare professionals
doesn't work very well.
Even good doctors and nurses make mistakes during the most routine of
tasks. Clearly, the root cause of medical errors is more systemic.
Medicine has some of the most advanced technology for treating patients
and some of the most rudimentary systems for ensuring quality. Taking a
look at the systems that ensure patient safety will go farther in
addressing the problem of medical errors rather than reprimanding any
one individual or group.
Over the past few decades we have seen one industry after another
adopt the principles of continuous quality improvement. The government
itself has instituted these principles, notably in its regulation of
aviation. Focusing on punishment will only deter improvement.
Having said that, we are not interested in sweeping problems under
the rug, but bringing them out into the open. And if an individual is
harmed, this bill in no way limits the legal recourse that patients
have now. The confidentiality protections are just for information that
is submitted under quality improvement and medical error reporting
systems. Patients and their lawyers will still have access to the
entire medical record just like they do now.
Our bill also creates a new center for patient safety through AHRQ as
the IOM report recommended. This Center will collect information on
medical errors and serve as a center to develop strategies to reduce
them. It is likely that additional funding beyond the $20 million
recommended by the President will be needed for AHRQ's new role
overseeing this center for patient safety.
We also need to allow for confidentiality--through peer review
protections--for information that is voluntarily submitted regarding
medical errors. This legislation provides for these protections.
Once the information is collected and analyzed, either through AHRQ
or another deemed institution, such as the Vermont Program for Quality
in Health Care, recommendations on ways to prevent errors need to be
developed and disseminated throughout the health care industry.
It is my hope that these recommendations will continue to be
incorporated into survey instruments by organizations such as the Joint
Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, the
accrediting body responsible for hospitals and other inpatient
healthcare settings. In this way, the health care industry can engage
in the kind of continuous quality improvement that is vital to curbing
errors and saving lives. But a medical errors program will only succeed
if hospitals, doctors and other health professionals support it and
participate in it willingly.
Neither the IOM nor Congress discovered this problem. Health care
professionals have been at work for some time in trying to address
medical errors. I hope that by becoming a partner in this process, the
federal government can accelerate the pace of reform and provide the
most effective structure possible.
I am pleased that our legislation has the support of many, including
the United States Pharmacopeia, the American Hospital Association, the
American Health Quality Association, the American College of
Physicians/American Society of Internal Medicine, the American
Psychological Association, and the Institute for Safe Medication
Practices.
Mr. President, we cannot afford to wait on this issue. This
legislation will raise the quality of health care delivered by
decreasing medical errors and increasing patient safety and I will work
to ensure its enactment this year.
______
By Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. Helms, Mr. Moynihan,
[[Page S5264]]
Mr. Roth, Mr. Thurmond, and Mr. Warner):
S. 2739. A bill to amend title 39, United States Code, to provide for
the issuance of a semipostal stamp in order to afford the public a
convenient way to contribute to funding for the establishment of the
World War II Memorial; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
semipostal stamp for the establishment of the world war ii memorial
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce S. 2749, the
World War II Memorial Postage Stamp Act. The purpose of this bill is to
raise funds for the construction of the National World War II Memorial
by issuing a special World War II Memorial ``semipostal'' stamp.
Mr. President, many events have shaped world history, but none so
dramatically or so deeply as the Second World War. The war permanently
altered lives, communities, and nations, at the same time speeding
America's rise as a superpower.
The National World War II Memorial will honor the 16 million
Americans who served in uniform during the war, the more than 400,000
who gave their lives, and the millions more who supported the war
effort at home. A symbol of the defining event of 20th-century America,
the Memorial will honor the spirit, sacrifice, and commitment of the
American people as well as the cause of freedoom from tyranny
throughout the world.
To date, the World War II Memorial Fund, chaired by Bob Dole, has
raised approximately $92 million. Issuing a World War II Memorial Stamp
could raise millions more, helping the World War Memorial Fund reach
its goal of $100 million needed to construct and maintain the Memorial.
Furthermore, a new stamp would give every American the chance to play a
part in building this monument to those who served our Nation.
Mr. President, I served this great country as a member of the Armed
Forces during World War II, and I know firsthand the sacrifices made by
our Nation's veterans. It is my sincere hope that, thanks to this bill,
the National World War II Memorial will be a lasting symbol of American
unity--and a timeless reminder of the moral strength that joins the
citizens of this country.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the legislation was ordered to be printed
in the Record, as follows:
S. 2739
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SEMIPOSTAL STAMP FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
WORLD WAR II MEMORIAL.
(a) In General.--Chapter 4 of title 39, United States Code,
is amended by inserting after section 414 the following:
``Sec. 414a. Special postage stamp for the establishment of
the World War II Memorial
``(a) In order to afford the public a convenient way to
contribute to funding for the establishment of the World War
II Memorial, 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.
The use of the special rate of postage established under this
section shall be voluntary on the part of postal patrons.
``(c)(1) Amounts becoming available for the establishment
of the World War II Memorial under this section shall be paid
to the American Battle Monuments Commission. Payments under
this section shall be made under such arrangements as the
Postal Service shall by mutual agreement with the American
Battle Monuments Commission establish in order to carry out
the purposes of this section, except that, under those
arrangements, payments to such Commission shall be made at
least twice a year.
``(2) For purposes of this section, the term `amounts
becoming available for the establishment of the World War II
Memorial under this section' means--
``(A) the total amounts received by the Postal Service that
it 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.
``(d) It is the sense of the Congress that nothing in this
section should--
``(1) directly or indirectly cause a net decrease in total
Federal funding received by the American Battle Monuments
Commission 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.
``(e) 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 90 days after the date of the enactment of this
section or, if earlier, November 11, 2000 (Veterans Day).
``(f) 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 shall include--
``(1) the total amount described in subsection (c)(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 (c)(2)(B).
``(g) This section shall cease to be effective upon the
determination of the Postmaster General (in consultation with
the American Battle Monuments Commission) that the Commission
has or will have the funds necessary to pay all expenses of
the establishment of the World War II Memorial. Any excess
funds shall be deposited in the fund within the Treasury of
the United States created by section 2113 of title 36 and may
be used for any of the purposes allowable under such section.
``(h) As used in this section, the term `World War II
Memorial' refers to the memorial the construction of which is
authorized by Public Law 103-32.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--(1) The analysis 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 to benefit breast cancer research.
``414a. Special postage stamps for the establishment of the World War
II Memorial.''.
(2) The heading for section 414 of title 39, United States
Code, is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 414. Special postage stamps to benefit breast cancer
research''.
______
By Ms. LANDRIEU:
S. 2740. A bill to provide for the establishment of Individual
Development Accounts (IDAs) that will allow individuals and families
with limited means an opportunity to accumulate assets, to access
education, to own their own homes and businesses, and ultimately to
achieve economic self-sufficiency, and to increase the limit on
deductible IRA contributions, and for other purposes; to the Committee
on Finance.
the savings accounts are valuable for everyone act of 2000
Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I want to speak for a few moments this
morning and introduce a bill that I am calling the Savings Are Valuable
for Everyone Act, the SAVE Act of 2000.
Mr. President, as of February 1, 2000, the United States officially
entered into the longest period of economic expansion in our history.
This means we have had nine years of continuous growth--a hard-earned
achievement. During this time, we have had the first back-to-back
federal budget surpluses in 43 years, the smallest welfare rolls in 30
years, and 20 million new jobs for people across America.
Clearly we are doing something right. However, that does not mean our
work is done. In order for this economic prosperity to reach its full
potential, we must continue to provide more opportunities (not
guarantees) to widen the ``winners' circle'' and allow all Americans to
participate in our economic expansion.
According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the latest unemployment
figures show that most Americans do have jobs. The unemployment average
is 4.1 percent and many states have even lower rates, such as Iowa with
2.5 percent, New Hampshire with 2.7 percent, and Virginia with 2.8
percent. In some places across the country, there are some even higher
spots, such as Howard County, Maryland, where the unemployment rate is
a remarkable 1.4 percent. However, because of the high cost of living,
many working families
[[Page S5265]]
still struggle to make ends meet and are being forced to live from
paycheck to paycheck, without any hope of saving for the future or
building the tangible assets which are so important to upward mobility.
I recently finished reading the book, ``The Millionaire Next Door,''
and discovered that when the authors of this book began interviewing
millionaires as part of their research, they were surprised to find
most of the wealthy people they spoke with didn't drive fancy sports
cars, or have $5,000 gold watches or even live in fabulous mansions.
They were first-generation business people who, through aggressive
saving, sensible investing and frugal spending, had managed to
accumulate a significant amount of assets.
While not everyone's goal in life is to become a millionaire, this
book does carefully outline the road to fiscal security and clearly
documents the importance of saving.
I know that you will be as shocked as I was to learn that, while the
net worth of the typical American family has increased dramatically
recently, the net worth of families under $25,000 has actually been
decreasing. The Federal Reserve Board recently released a study which
showed that families earning under $10,000 a year had a medium net
worth of $1,900 in 1989. This figure rose to $4,800 in 1995 but slipped
to $3,600 by 1998. The net worth of families who earn less than $25,000
annually was $31,000 in 1995 but then dropped to $24,800 in 1998.
During this same time period, while the number of families who owned
a home or business rose overall, this figure among lower income
families has actually decreased. In 1995, 36.1 percent of families who
earned less than $10,000 a year owned a home, however by 1998 this
number had decreased to 34.5 percent. In 1995, 54.9 percent of families
who earn less than $25,000 annually owned their home but in 1998 this
percentage was reduced to 51.7 percent.
Mr. President, I rise today to address this problem by introducing
the Savings Are Valuable for Everyone Act of 2000, or SAVE, which will
help all families save for the future. The goal of SAVE is simple: help
the working poor build assets for themselves and to expand the IRA
limit to ensure retirement savings. The goal is not income
redistribution, but instead it is to find ways that allow opportunities
for everyone, regardless of income, to build the productive assets that
lead to economic security.
In order to help the working poor break the discouraging cycle of
living from paycheck to paycheck and to help the lower-middle class
move up the income ladder and save for the future, this measure
provides incentives for the accumulation of assets through the use of
Individual Development Accounts, or IDAs, while, at the same time,
making it easier for the rest of America to save for retirement.
IDAs are matched savings accounts which are restricted to three uses:
(1) post-secondary education/training; (2) small business start-up
costs; and (3) purchasing a first home. Private as well as state and
local public sector funds can also be contributed to the account with a
special tax credit of up to $500 a year attached to the private
contribution. Usually it takes two to four years for the account holder
to accumulate enough funds to purchase the asset they were saving for
and, before the money is released, they must complete an approved
financial education course which is provided by the qualified financial
institution or non-profit which holds the account.
All IDAs must be held at a ``qualified financial institutions,''
meaning, any financial institution qualified to hold an IRA. IDAs are
available to all citizens or legal residents of the United States who
are at least 18 years old and whose household income does not exceed 80
percent of the area median income, or AMI. At least 33 percent of the
IDAs will be targeted to households which are at 50 percent or below
the AMI. Contributions made by a participant into an IDA are limited to
$2,000 per year. While the individuals who open these accounts are
encouraged to use the money for their own benefit, they may withdraw it
to help a spouse or dependent open a business, buy a house, or further
their education.
For example, one such program was started in March of 1999, by
Hibernia Bank Louisiana. They began pilot IDA programs in New Orleans,
with another one operating in Shreveport, to help low-income families
save for a house. So far, 11 families are participating in the New
Orleans program, with seven already placed in homes of their own and
four shopping for one.
The program administrator said these 11 families ``absolutely would
not be in a position to buy a home at this time'' without this program.
Hibernia matches the account holders funds two-to-one up to a set
amount. The funds then can be used for home-buying costs, such as a
down payment or closing costs--lump sums that often can be prohibitive
to working families on a tight budget.
In order to encourage the establishment of IDAs, two tax credits are
offered. The first is available to participating financial
institutions. For every dollar saved in an IDA, the qualified financial
institution will provide a one to one match, limited to $500 per person
per year. The financial institution would then be eligible for a 90
percent federal tax credit for matching funds provided.
The second tax credit is known as the IDA Investment Tax Credit. In
order to leverage private sector investments and encourage broader
community involvement in this program, a 50 percent tax credit will be
available for investments in qualified non-profits, 501(c)(3)s or
credit unions, which can administer qualified IDA programs. However, in
order qualify for this tax credit, at least 70 percent of the funds
received must be used for financial education, program monitoring, and/
or program administration. Any taxpayer can participate can participate
as a donor.
It is important to remember that each IDA consists of two parallel
accounts--one that the participants make his deposits into and one that
the donor makes their deposits of matching funds into. The interest
on the money in the participant's account would be taxed while all
funds in the matching account (including interest) would be tax free.
One could say that the participant's account is treated in a similar
fashion to the way that the IRS treats IRAs and 401(k)s.
Already an estimated 3,000 people nationwide are taking advantage of
available pilot programs, which are run in partnership with more than
100 nonprofit organizations and authorized financial institutions. This
fact shows the strength of this plan: it serves as a catalyst for the
rapid creation of public-private partnerships--between accountholders,
banks, foundations, policymakers and providers of financial education--
that are the hallmark of successful IDA programs.
As you can see, IDAs are not only good for individuals and their
families, they also are good for the future of our country. Russell
Long once said, ``The problem with Capitalism is that there are not
enough Capitalists.'' IDAs provide a tool with which our country can
address this age-old problem and help create more Capitalists. When
capitalism is combined with the proper social safety nets and
incentives for asset development for those at all income levels, we
create incentives for saving at all levels while you create a
capitalist system that works for everybody. These accounts are a sure-
fire mechanism that will build assets and create wealth among the
families and communities who need help the most.
Economic analyses of the impact of a national IDA investment show
that for every dollar invested, a $5 return to the national economy
would result in the form of new businesses, new jobs, increased
earnings, higher tax receipts and reduced welfare expenditures.
However, it is important to realize that the Savings Accounts Are
Valuable for Everyone Act does not simply focus on the working poor. It
also provides savings incentives for the middle class by expanding the
current Individual Retirement Account limits from $2,000 a year to
$3,500.
Currently, our tax code allows individuals to save up to $2,000 a
year in IRAs with income earned on the deposits either being tax
deferred until withdrawal, which can begin at age 59\1/2\, or, through
the use of the Roth IRA, the taxes can be paid up front on the money
deposited into the accounts. SAVE will make these accounts an even
better tool for retirement saving by expanding the annual contribution
limits.
I firmly believe that we must find ways to shift our nation's policy
from
[[Page S5266]]
one of consumption to one of savings and wealth accumulation for all
American households. To understand why, one need only consider these
facts which were calculated by the Corporation for Enterprise
Development in Washington, D.C.:
One-half of all American households have less than $1,000 in net
financial assets;
One-third of all American households and 60 percent of African-
American households have zero or negative net financial assets;
Forty percent of all white children and 73 percent of all black
children grow up in households with zero or negative financial assets;
By some estimates, 13-20 percent of all American households do not
even have a checking or savings account; and
Ten percent of all American households control two-thirds of the
wealth.
We already have a tax code that provides over $300 billion in federal
tax expenditures which are dedicated to asset building for middle- and
upper-income wage earners and businesses, but tax-based incentives are
still out of reach for most lower- and middle-income families. In this
time of wealth and prosperity, why can't we offer tools that will
assist in asset building for the families who need them the most--the
working poor and moderate-income families who make up the backbone of
our economic system.
Benjamin Franklin once said, ``The wealth of an individual is
measured not by what a person earns but by what he saves.''
Take the example of Oseola McCarty of Mississippi. Oseola toiled in
obscurity for most of her life, taking in other people's laundry for $2
a bundle and amassing a small fortune by socking away every extra cent
in a savings account. At the age of 87, she donated $150,000 of her
life savings to the University of Southern Mississippi, establishing a
scholarship fund to give African-American youths a chance for the
education she never received.
What Oseola accomplished is a great example of the power of savings.
Savings, investing and assets--not necessarily income--determine
wealth. Just think what Oseola could have accomplished, not only for
herself but for others, with the benefit of a program like IDAs to add
matching funds and additional interest to her hard-earned savings.
IDAs are partnerships between the government, the community and the
individual to build stronger families and a stronger economy. For not
only do Americans improve their economic security through the building
of assets, this also stimulates the development of capital for the
entire nation. As our nation continues to build on our recent economic
successes, we in Congress must continue to look for innovative ways to
give working families the tools they need to plan for the future.
Passage of the Savings Accounts are Valuable for Everyone Act is one
way we can do this.
Mr. President, to summarize my comments, I will share a story about
what this act, if passed and adopted, will do. There is a family in
Washington, the Darden family. Selena and Dwayne Darden thought they
were doing the best they could do. They were both working, earning
about 150 percent of the poverty rate. They had four children and were
doing a very good job of raising their children, but basically living
paycheck to paycheck. They never thought they could save for the future
or, for that matter, own a home. There just wasn't anything extra.
Then just about 2 years ago, according to this article, Selena, who
is a beautician, heard about something called Individual Development
Accounts, a program that was offered here in Washington with the
Capital Area Asset Building Corporation. They inquired and were told
basically that this was a pilot program that Congress had established a
few years earlier that would allow her and her husband to put up some
savings, which would be matched by the Federal Government through an
appropriate financial institution and a community agency that would
provide some education and support for the effort. If she was a
consistent and good saver, she and her husband could save enough for a
downpayment. The end of the story is that they did; they saved enough.
They are now proud homeowners right here in Marshall Heights.
I share that story because that is exactly what this bill does. In my
State, in the last few years, I have come to learn about these pilot
programs that we initiated through the work of Senator Coats, and
Senator Santorum has been on this issue for some time, and Senator
Lieberman has been advocating this proposal. I want to add my voice by
introducing this bill to say how much I support this effort, and to
take these pilot programs that have been successful and expand them
nationwide.
In Louisiana, I have come across many families from New Orleans to
Shreveport, and elsewhere, who are coming into partnership with the
Hibernia Bank and community action organizations, such as the
Providence House in Louisiana, that help families get back on their
feet when they go through a crisis. The idea is to help create these
accounts. People can begin saving money.
The bill allows for them to either use the funds for home ownership,
because we know how important that is, or building a person's
confidence and self-esteem--how important it is for children to live in
a home that actually belongs to them, as opposed to renting and perhaps
having to move, and to be able to put down roots. We know how important
that is.
This bill will allow people to save to start up a business. We spend
a lot of time in Washington talking about business. Sometimes I think
we focus on businesses that are actually quite large, which is
wonderful; but we need to focus on the great strength of America, which
is small business--that entrepreneur out there who takes a risk to
start a business. He employs himself and one, two, or three other
people. That is the backbone of the American economy and the great
system we have enjoyed. We are really the envy of the world. This bill
will allow for people to save a few thousand dollars to start a
successful business and employ members of their family, or friends, or
other workers in their area.
I am hoping we can potentially consider, as this bill moves through
the process, that it may allow savings for a transportation vehicle. If
you can get a good job, sometimes the jobs are not necessarily where
people live. Mass transit is not as dependable as it should be. Perhaps
we should consider this matched savings plan to give people the ability
to get a vehicle and to be able to drive to work. Some of these pilots
allow that.
This bill will allow for these savings accounts. It is limited to
households of 80 percent of the median income, based on regions, and
150 percent of the national poverty rate. While that might work for
Louisiana, it doesn't work very well for poor families in Connecticut
or California, where the standard of living is high.
We have designed this bill to reach to the low-income working poor.
But we are sensitive to the different regions in this Nation. We
believe if we can help people accumulate assets and encourage them to
save, that not only is it good for individual families but it is good
for our Nation to encourage savings rates.
Let me share a few statistics about this which are of very great
concern to me and of which I would like my colleagues to be more aware.
According to a recent report by the Corporation for Enterprise
Development in Washington, DC, one-half of all American households have
less than $1,000 in financial assets; one-third of all American
households and 60 percent of African American households have zero, or
negative financial assets; 40 percent of all white children and 73
percent of all African American children grow up in households with
zero or negative financial assets; by some estimates, 13 to 20 percent
of all American households do not have a checking or a savings account;
and 10 percent of all American households control currently two-thirds
of the wealth.
If we want to address an income gap, if we want to try to increase
prosperity, if we want to try to eliminate poverty, I suggest that our
efforts have to be more than just income, more than just about full
employment or a job. It is about income, frugal spending, and
aggressive savings. And we
[[Page S5267]]
should be partnering with the American people to do just that, to
encourage wealth and assets creation and development.
Not everyone wants to be a millionaire. Some people are better at
that than others. But I don't know of a family that doesn't want to
have financial security--not one. Whether they work at a relatively
modest job from 9 to 5, or whether they work two jobs, or three, or
whether they are quite aggressive and well educated enough to make
large sums of money, in every case I think it is about security. It is
about choices. But I don't know any family that doesn't want to be
secure. We can be better partners in this Government by encouraging
policies such as this that enable people to be part of that American
dream, to widen the winners circle, because we have the greatest
economic expansion underway and there is a cost-effective way to do it.
Let me just make a couple of other points as I close.
According to some documents that are supporting this policy, let me
read for the Record a couple of things:
No. 1, assets matter and have largely been ignored in poverty policy
debates.
No. 2, individual development accounts address the wealth gap and
bring people into the financial mainstream.
No. 3, public policy plays a large role in determining levels of
household wealth.
People say, We can't afford to do this. They ask, Why would we want
to do this for a certain group of people, low- and moderate-income
people? One reason is we already do it to the tune of $300 billion for
middle-income and wealthy individuals and businesses. It is called tax
incentives. All throughout our Tax Code and public policy, we are
already putting up $300 billion to help create and maintain assets for
the wealthy and for businesses. Let's do the same for the working poor
and lower and middle class so they can be more able to join this
extraordinary economic expansion. We do that through IRAs and 401(k)s
and IDAs, which are good national investments and they improve the
national savings rate.
In conclusion, let me say that this SAVE Act will expand IDA. It also
raises the income limits for IRAs for all families in America to
encourage them to save. By expanding the opportunities for IRAs, which
many of us have supported in a bipartisan way, and by implementing IDAs
from pilots to a national model, I believe we could go a long way in
eliminating poverty, expanding the middle class, and expanding and
widening the winners circle in this great economic expansion.
I share this with my colleagues. I thank again Senator Lieberman for
his great work. Senator Santorum has also been leading this effort.
Senator Dan Coats, who is no longer serving with us, I understand was
one of the original sponsors of this pilot program. It is now time. We
know it works to take it national. That is what we do with this bill.
I yield whatever time I may have.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert additional material
into the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
IDAs: Federal Policy
The benefits and rationale for enacting federal IDA policy
can be summarized in five parts:
1. Assets matter, and have been largely ignored in poverty
policy. Assets provide an economic cushion and enable people
to make investments in their futures in a way that income
alone cannot provide. IDAs address a big piece of the poverty
puzzle--the savings and asset base of the poor--that has
never been addressed before.
2. IDAs address the wealth gap and bring people into the
financial mainstream. Despite the growing trend of average
Americans investing in stocks and mutual funds, many are
being left behind. One-third of all American households have
zero or negative net financial assets, and up to 20 percent
of all households do not even have a checking or savings
account.
3. Public policy plays a large role in determining levels
of household wealth.--Nearly $300 billion in federal tax
expenditures are dedicated to asset building for middle- and
upper-income people (for home ownership, retirement, and
investing). But public policies often penalize low-income
people or put tax-based asset incentives out of their reach.
4. Individual asset accounts (like IDAs) are the future of
asset building. Increasingly, asset accounts such as IRA's,
401(k)s, medical savings accounts, individual training
accounts and other individual savings incentives are the
emerging tools for wealth-building policy in the new global,
flexible economy. IDAs are an inclusive extension of this
policy trend.
5. IDAs are a good national investment and improve the
national savings rate. Economic analyses of the impact of a
national IDA investment show that for every dollar invested,
a five dollar return to the national economy would result in
the form of new businesses, new jobs, increased earnings,
higher tax receipts, and reduced welfare expenditures. At the
same time, IDAs will increase core deposits at a time when
many Americans are moving to other investment vehicles. And,
importantly, IDAs help address the growing problem of the
declining national personal savings rate.
______
By Mr. JOHNSON (for himself, Mr. Conrad, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Dorgan,
Mr. Roberts, Mr. Levin, Mr. Kerrey, Mr. Grassley, and Mr.
Craig):
S. 2741. A bill to amend the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987 to
extend the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to provide grants
for State mediation programs dealing with agricultural issues, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry.
mediation program legislation introduction
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr President, I rise on the floor of the Senate today to
introduce bipartisan legislation to extend a popular program which
provides mediation services between agricultural producers and the
various credit and United States Department of Agriculture agencies who
family farmers and ranchers work with to maintain their operations.
During the 1980's farm crisis, Congress authorized federal
participation in a state farm mediation program. Originally authorized
in the Agriculture Credit Act of 1987, mediation programs help
agricultural producers and their creditors to resolve credit disputes
(and other types of disputes) in a confidential and non-adversarial
setting which is outside the traditional process of litigation,
appeals, bankruptcy, and foreclosure.
The mediators are neutral facilitators and they do not make decisions
for the disputing parties.
Federal legislation has encouraged state involvement by providing
matching grant funds to the states that participate in the mediation
program. Currently, 24 states participate, including Alabama, Arkansas,
Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan,
Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota,
Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin, and
Wyoming.
Beyond the scope of agricultural credit-related mediation, the
program aims to resolve disputes such as wetland determinations,
grazing issues, and USDA program compliance, and other issues the
Secretary of Agriculture deems appropriate.
Each year, Congress seeks to provide funding for the mediation
program through the Agriculture Appropriations process. This year $3
million has been appropriated for this program in both the House and
Senate Agriculture Appropriation bills. This legislation will not
change the fact that Congress must go through the Appropriations
process each year to secure funding for this program.
The legislation my colleagues and I are introducing today
reauthorizes the mediation program by eliminating the sunset clause
(set to expire in FY 2000), clarifies that funds appropriated by
Congress to the mediation program must be used for farm credit cases
(including USDA direct and guaranteed loans and loans from commercial
entities) and may be used for other USDA program disputes, and
clarifies that mediation services can include counseling services to
prepare parties to a dispute prior to mediation.
In a time when family farmers and ranchers continue to deal with low
prices and suffer under more and more vertical integration, I believe
we must begin to reflect on what we can do to maintain the independent
family farms and ranches that our country depends on for our food
supply. We live in a day and age where nearly every farm and ranch
operation must secure credit in order to pay production expenditures
necessary to stay in business. This mediation program is supported by
both
[[Page S5268]]
sides of the aisle and allows farmers and ranchers to settle their
credit and farm program disputes in a fair way without digging
themselves into legal debt.
I have worked with the lone Congressman from my home state of South
Dakota in drafting this legislation and the same bill will be
introduced in the House of Representatives today as well.
I urge my colleagues of the Senate to join me in supporting this bi-
partisan legislation with the goal of moving it through the legislative
process quickly in order to continue to provide these services to our
American farmers and ranchers.
______
By Mr. SMITH of Oregon (for himself, Mr Abraham, Mr. Ashcroft,
Mr. Burns, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Gorton, Mrs. Hutchison, Mr.
Allard, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Helms, Mr.
Thomas, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Mack, Mr. Warner, Mr. Bunning, Mr.
Lott, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Crapo, and Mr. Roberts):
S. 2742. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
increase disclosure for certain political organizations exempt from tax
under section 527 and section 501(c), and for other purposes; read the
first time.
tax-exempt political disclosure act introduction
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce
legislation, co-sponsored by 20 of my Senate colleagues, to bring
sunshine to our campaign finance laws, to provide for full disclosure
of contributions and expenditures of groups which have heretofore not
been held accountable, yet have been subsidized by the American people
through their tax-exempt status.
Joining me in this effort are Senators Abraham, Ashcroft, Burns,
Santorum, Gorton, Hutchison, Allard, Bennett, Coverdell, Gregg, Helms,
Thomas, Inhofe, Mack, Warner, Bunning, Lott, McConnell, Crapo, and
Roberts.
I have long been a proponent of full disclosure, to the extent it is
consistent with the First Amendment, of campaign contributions and
expenditures.
If we are to rekindle the trust of the American people, not only must
the political parties be held accountable, so, too, must those tax-
exempt groups which engage in political activities, yet heretofore have
operated outside the realm of disclosure. The public has the right to
know the identity of those trying to influence our elections, and
Congress must do whatever it can to make sure that organizations do not
wrongly benefit from the public subsidy of tax exemption.
The bill we are introducing today, the Tax-Exempt Political
Disclosure Act, expands upon the McCain-Lieberman amendment of last
week which targeted a narrow list of tax-exempt organizations
established under section 527 of the tax code. The so-called 527 groups
covered in this bill do not make contributions to candidates or engage
in express advocacy, and thus are not required to publicly disclose
contributors or expenditures. Our bill contains in its entirety the
provisions of the McCain-Lieberman amendment, but goes beyond the 527
groups to require tax-exempt labor and business organizations, as well,
to disclose their contributors and expenditures.
Specifically, in Title I of our bill, which is identical to the
McCain-Lieberman amendment, we require the subset of 527 organizations
that are not already subject to the Federal Election Campaign Act to:
1. Disclose their existence to the IRS;
2. File publicly available tax returns;
3. Publicly report expenditures of over $500; and
4. Identify those who contribute more than $200 annually to the
organization.
Title II of our bill applies to business or labor organizations that
are tax-exempt under sections 501(c)(5) or 501(c)(6) of the Internal
Revenue Code and that spend $25,000 or more on the very same kinds of
political activities engaged in by section 527 organizations covered by
Title I of our bill. As we do with the 527 organizations, we require
tax-exempt business and labor organizations to report expenditures for
political activity of $500 or more and identify those who contribute
more than $200 annually.
Importantly, this legislation will not result in disclosure of any
labor or business organization's membership lists because annual dues
to these tax-exempt groups are excluded from the definition of
``contribution.'' The bill requires disclosure only of those members
who choose to contribute more than $200 annually for political
purposes.
If the Senate is for disclosure of the few tax-exempt 527
organizations that may spend a couple of million dollars on issue ads,
then surely we should advocate disclosure of the tax-exempt labor and
business organizations that will spend twenty or forty times that
amount of money on issue ads and other political activity. Our
legislation will require these organizations receiving tax exempt
status to emerge from the shadows and make some minimal disclosure
about themselves and the source of their money.
Tax exemption is not an entitlement, and any organization wanting to
avoid the ramifications of claiming such status simply may choose not
to seek that status. Our bill merely says that if a group engaging in
political activity wants tax exempt status, the public has a right to
expect certain things in return.
Let me make clear that we are sincere in this effort, and we welcome
and invite Senators McCain and Feingold to work with us. We are open to
discussions with business and labor groups, as well, on the mechanics
of the bill. We want to be flexible and will consider changes where
appropriate.
The bottom line, however, is that in the end there must be meaningful
disclosure if we are to have the confidence of the American people and
bring integrity to the process.
______
By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. Dodd, and Mrs. Murray):
S. 2743. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to develop an
infrastructure for creating a national voluntary reporting system to
continually reduce medical errors and improve patient safety to ensure
that individuals receive high quality health care; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
THE VOLUNTARY ERROR REDUCTION AND IMPROVEMENT IN PATIENT SAFETY ACT
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, between 44,000 and 98,000 patients
die each year from medical errors, making it the eighth leading cause
of death in the United States. Each day, more than 250 people die
because of medical errors--the equivalent of a major airplane crash
every day. Estimates of the annual financial cost of preventable errors
run as high as $29 billion a year. We can do better for our citizens.
We must do better.
The Voluntary Error Reduction and Improvement in Patient Safety Act
of 2000, which Senator Dodd and I are introducing today, will provide
the federal investment and framework necessary to take the first steps
to effectively treat this continuing epidemic of medical errors. Today,
there errors are a stealth plague hidden deep within the world's best
health care system. This legislation will support needed research in
this area, and identify and reduce common mistakes.
Reducing medical errors can save lives and health care dollars, and
avoid countless family tragedies. The field of anesthesia had the
foresight to undertake such an effort almost 20 years ago, and today,
the number of fatalities from errors in administering anesthesia has
dropped by 98 percent. Our goal should be to achieve equal or even
greater success in reducing other types of medical mistakes. This
legislation lays the foundation to achieve this goal.
The 1999 Institute of Medicine report, To Err is Human, documented
the compelling need for aggressive national action on the issue. The
IOM report recommended the creation of two reporting systems, each with
different goals. The first is a voluntary confidential reporting system
to learn about medical errors and help researchers develop solutions
for future error prevention and reduction. The second is a mandatory
public reporting system for certain serious errors and deaths in order
to inform the public and hold health care facilities responsible for
their mistakes.
Our legislation today deals with the first issue, but the second
issue is also critical. I believe that the public has a right-to-know
about certain serious events, and public disclosure is an important
tool to assure that institutions
[[Page S5269]]
put safety on the front burner, not the back burner.
I commend the Administration for recognizing the value of mandatory
reporting by recently establishing such programs in the Department of
Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense health care systems. The
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality is also in the process of
evaluating existing mandatory reporting systems, and the Health Care
Financing Administration is planning to sponsor a mandatory reporting
demonstration project for selected private hospitals. I believe our
next step should be to move ahead with mandatory reporting, and the
results of these studies will shed needed light on the effectiveness of
different options.
The bill we introduce today would take a significant first step
toward implementing and providing support for the recommendations in
the IOM report.
The overwhelming majority of errors are caused by flaws in the health
care system, not the outright negligence of individual doctors and
nurses. Our hospitals, doctors, nurses, and other health care providers
want to do the right thing. Our proposal gives the health care
community the tools to identify the causes of medical errors, the
resources to develop strategies to prevent them, and the encouragement
to implement those solutions.
First, the Act creates a new patient safety center in the Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality. The Center for Quality Improvement and
Patient Safety will improve and promote patient safety by conducting
and supporting research on medical errors, administering the national
medical error reporting systems created under this bill, and
disseminating evidence-based practices and other error reduction and
prevention strategies to health care providers, purchasers and the
public.
Second, the legislation would establish national voluntary reporting
and surveillance systems under AHRQ to identify, track, prevent and
reduce medical errors. The National Patient Safety Reporting System
will allow health care professionals, health care facilities, and
patients to voluntarily report adverse events and close calls. The
National Patient Safety Surveillance System would establish a
surveillance system, which is modeled on a successful CDC initiative
that tracks hospital-acquired infections, for health care facilities
that choose to participate. Participating facilities will include a
representative sample of various institutions, which will monitor,
analyze, and report selected adverse events and close calls.
Researchers will provide feedback to the participating facilities.
Reports submitted to both programs will be analyzed to identify
systemic faults that led to the errors, and recommend solutions to
prevent similar errors in the future.
In order to encourage participation, reports and analyses from both
programs will be protected from discovery, and health care workers who
submit reports to the programs will be protected against workplace
retaliation based on their participation in the reporting systems.
In exchange for establishing this reporting system, health care
facilities and professionals would be expected to voluntarily implement
appropriate patient safety solutions as they are developed. In
addition, in recognition of the significant federal investments in
error reduction strategies and the provision of health services, the
Secretary of Health and Human Services will be required to develop a
process for determining which evidence-based practices should be
applied to programs under the Secretary's authority. The Secretary will
take appropriate, reasonable steps to assure implementation of these
practices.
Our proposal also requires the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management to develop a similar process for determining which evidence-
based practices should be used as purchasing standards for the Federal
Employees Health Benefits Program. Plans will also be rated on how well
they met these standards, and compliance ratings will be provided to
federal employees and retirees during the annual enrollment period.
The bill authorizes $50,000,000 for the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality for FY 2001, increasing to $200,000,000 in FY
2005, to fund error-related research and the reporting systems.
Systemic errors in the health care system put every patient at risk
of injury. The measure we propose today is designed to reduce that risk
as much as possible. Americans deserve the highest quality health care.
This bill will raise patient safety to a high national priority, and
ensure that patient safety becomes part of every citizen's expectation
of high quality health care. This is essential legislation, and I look
forward to working with my colleagues to expedite its passage and to
develop companion legislation that establishes a mandatory reporting
system.
I ask unanimous consent that the following summary, fact sheet, and
letters of support be inserted into the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Voluntary Error Reduction and Improvement in Patient Safety Act of
2000: Summary
According to the November 1999 Institute of Medicine
report, ``To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System,''
between 44,000 and 98,000 patients die each year as a result
of mistakes. Estimates of total annual national costs for
preventable errors range from $17 to $29 billion. This
legislation amends the Public Health Service Act to establish
a national non-punitive system to prevent and reduce medical
errors. Provisions are designed to: (1) identify and
investigate certain medical errors; (2) develop and
disseminate best practices to prevent and reduce medical
errors; and (3) assure implementation of evidence-based error
reduction strategies.
CENTER FOR PATIENT SAFETY
Authorizes the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
(AHRQ) to: (1) create a Center for Quality Improvement and
Patient Safety to promote patient safety; (2) serve as a
central publicly accessible clearinghouse for information
concerning patient safety; (3) administer the reporting
systems created under this legislation; (4) conduct and fund
research on the causes of and best practices to reduce
medical errors; and (5) disseminate evidence-based
information to guide in the development and continuous
improvement of best practices.
REPORTING SYSTEMS
Creates two national voluntary, and confidential reporting
systems under AHRQ: (1) a reporting system of adverse events
and close calls that uses uniform reporting standards and
forms; and (2) a surveillance system in which participating
health care facilities agree to monitor, analyze, and report
specified adverse events and close calls that occur in their
institutions. Reports submitted to both programs will be
protected from discovery, and analyzed to identify errors
that result from faults in the health care system. Neither
program will preempt existing nor preclude the later
development of new reporting systems.
Health care professionals who submit reports to the
reporting systems, their employer, or an appropriate
regulatory agency or private accrediting body may not be
discriminated against in their employment for reporting.
AUTHORIZATION LEVELS
Authorizes $50,000,000 for AHRQ for fiscal year 2001, with
gradual increases to $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, to
fund error-related research and the reporting systems.
APPLICATION TO FEDERAL PROGRAMS
Requires the Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services to: (1) develop a process for determining
which evidence-based best practices disseminated by AHRQ
should be applied to programs under the Secretary's
authority; and (2) take reasonable steps as may be
appropriate to bring about the implementation of such
practices. Requires the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management to develop a process for determining which
evidence-based best practices disseminated by AHRQ should be
used as purchasing standards for the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program.
____
Fact Sheet: The Need for the Voluntary Error Reduction and Improvement
of Patient Safety Act (VERIPSA)
In December, 1999, the Institute of Medicine issued a
report, To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health Care System,
that documents the compelling need for national action to
reduce errors and improve patient safety:
Between 44,000 and 98,000 patients die each year as a
result of medical errors, making medical errors the eighth
leading cause of death.
Errors in the health care system result in more deaths each
year than highway accidents, breast cancer or AIDS. Errors
that seriously injure or otherwise harm patients are even
more prevalent.
In 1993, medication errors alone are estimated to have
accounted for 7,000 deaths. Two percent of patients admitted
to hospitals experience an adverse event caused by medication
errors, resulting in $2 billion in
[[Page S5270]]
national spending for additional hospital costs related to
preventable medication errors for inpatients.
Total annual national costs (e.g., health care, lost wages/
productivity, disability) resulting from medical errors are
estimated to be between $38 and $50 billion, including $17-29
billion for preventable events.
VERIPSA Can Save Lives and Reduce Health Care Costs
The report found that most medical errors are the result of
flaws in the health care system, rather than carelessness by
health professionals, including, for example, errors that
arise from misreading a physician's handwritten prescription.
Many of these problems can be minimized through better
systems and computerization.
Over the last two decades, a systematic effort to reduce
deaths from errors in administering anesthesia has resulted
in a decline from two deaths per 10,000 patients in the early
1980s to one death per 300,000 patients today.
One study found that 60 percent of preventable adverse drug
events could be avoided by physician computer-entry order
systems.
The experience on other industries has shown the
effectiveness of concerted efforts to reduce errors. Since
1976, the death rate from airline accidents has declined
400%. Since the creation of the Occupational Safey and Health
Administration in 1970, the workplace death rate has been cut
in half.
The Institute of Medicine report concludes that a reduction
in medical errors of 50% over the next five years is
achievable and should be a minimum target for national
action.
____
American Health
Quality Association,
Washington, DC, June 15, 2000.
Statement on the ``Voluntary Error Reduction and Improvement in Patient
Safety Act''
The American Health Quality Association (AHQA) represents
the national network of Quality Improvement Organizations
(QIOs), which are known as the Peer Review Organizations
(PROs), for their Medicare quality improvement work. The QIOs
have vast clinical and analytic expertise, work daily with
providers across the country, and know how to affect systemic
change and bring about measurable improvement in care. They
are experts at translating the literature and research
regarding best practices from ``bookshelf to bedside'' and
teaching providers how to perform ongoing measurement of
their progress.
Senator Kennedy and Senator Dodd have done a commendable
job of addressing all of the various aspects of what is
necessary for a national system for improving patient safety.
In their ``Voluntary Error Reduction and Improvement in
Patient Safety Act,'' they direct AHRQ to establish a Center
for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety to conduct
research of medical errors and disseminate information on the
best practices for reducing them. The bill also proposes two
reporting systems that are voluntary, non-punitive, and
confidential. One system asks providers to report adverse
events and close calls to AHRQ using uniformed standards and
forms. The other asks providers to agree to monitor specific
types of adverse events as directed by AHRQ.
AHQA is pleased that AHRQ is given the authority to
contract with experts in the field to work with health care
providers and practitioners to identify adverse events and
determine what systemic changes are necessary to prevent them
for recurring. AHQA's goal in the patient safety debate is to
make sure that true quality improvement is achieved. We do
not support error reporting for the sake of reporting.
Organizations, such as the QIOs, should be encouraged to work
side by side with providers and practitioners to improve
their health care delivery systems.
``The Voluntary Error Reduction and Improvement in Patient
Safety Act'' then goes beyond reporting and research by
directing the Secretary of HHS to take the best practices
disseminated by AHRQ and apply them, as may be appropriate,
to programs under the Secretary's authority. The bill
specifically directs the Secretary to enter into agreements
with the QIOs (through their PRO work) to provide, upon
request, technical assistance regarding best practices and
root-cause analysis to health care providers participating in
HHS funded health programs.
AHQA believes it is the appropriate next step to regime HHS
to apply the most up-to-date methods for assuring patient
safety to its health care programs. The QIOs stand ready to
assist the Director of AHRQ and the Secretary of HHS in their
efforts to help the medical community find the root cause of
adverse events that are occurring and help develop strategies
for preventing them in the future.
____
Massachusetts Hospital Association,
Burlington, MA, June 15, 2000.
Hon. Edward M. Kennedy,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Kennedy: On behalf of the hospitals in
Massachusetts, I am writing to applaud the introduction of
your legislation ``The Error Reduction and Improvement in
Patient Safety Act.'' This bill will no doubt serve as a
major step toward making patient safety a national priority.
We hope that many aspects of this legislation will become
law. In particular, we support your suggested process to
ensure that proven practices to reduce medical errors are
implemented. In addition, we also believe that your efforts
to improve confidentiality protections for reporting will go
a long way towards creating a safe environment that supports
open dialogue about errors, their causes, and solutions.
Thanks to you and your staff, Massachusetts continues to be
on the forefront of the national debate about how best to
address this important issue.
Sincerely,
Andrew Dreyfus,
Executive Vice President.
____
Federation of Behavioral, Psychological and Cognitive
Sciences,
Washington, DC, June 15, 2000.
Hon. Edward Kennedy,
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Kennedy: I am writing on behalf of the
Federation of Behavioral, Psychological and Cognitive
Sciences, a coalition of 19 scientific associations. Among
its scientists are human factors researchers whose work is
devoted to understanding and reducing the adverse effects of
medical errors. I write to endorse the ``Voluntary Error
Reduction and Improvement in Patient Safety Act.''
This bill recognizes that human error in healthcare
settings has reached epidemic proportions and will provide an
infrastructure for centralized error reporting systems.
Important provisions of the bill will allow healthcare
providers to learn from such reporting systems by creating
interdisciplinary partnerships to conduct root cause analyses
across a wide range of health care settings.
Such analyses will help detect error trends and inform new
lines of directed inquiry and hypothesis-driven research to
reduce errors. The bill highlights the pivotal role of human
factors research in understanding human error in any context
and would draw upon the success of human factors as it has
been applied in many other industries such as aviation,
maritime shipping, and nuclear power to improve safety.
As in these other industries, particularly as evidenced in
aviation, the real value of error reporting lies in the
development of useful applications of the reported data to
improve safety. The ``Voluntary Error Reduction and
Improvement in Patient Safety Act'' clearly lays out the
infrastructure to promote the development of evidence-based
interventions to improve safety. Further, unique features of
this learning system include basic behavioral principles of
positive reinforcement to stimulate voluntary reporting. Such
a positive feedback loop will surely strengthen the quality
of the database this bill will structure. The database will
form the foundation for a bold new way of thinking about
patient safety. The data and the research, in turn, will make
attainable the goal we all strive for, the dramatic reduction
of adverse events in health care settings.
We believe the Kennedy-Dodd bill is a very strong plan for
reducing adverse events due to medical error. We also find
much to praise in the Jeffords bill. So we take the unusual
step of endorsing both and encourage work to meld the unique
features of these two extraordinary bills into a coherent
whole that will then surely receive the overwhelming support
of the Congress.
Sincerely,
David Johnson,
Executive Director.
Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my
colleague, the distinguished chairman of the Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions Committee (HELP), Senator Jeffords, in introducing today a
critical piece of legislation that will take needed steps to improve
the quality of health care delivered in this country. The goal of our
legislation today is to improve patient safety by reducing medical
errors throughout the health care system.
The Institute of Medicine Report (IOM), released last November,
sparked a national debate about how safe our hospitals and health care
settings actually are for patients. The scope of the problem identified
in the findings were shocking. The IOM found that each year an
estimated 44,000 to 98,000 hospital deaths occur as a result of
preventable adverse events. This makes medical errors the 8th leading
cause of death, with more deaths than vehicle accidents, breast cancer
or AIDS. These errors cost our Nation $37.6 billion to $50 billion per
year, representing 4 percent of national health expenditures.
Despite the recent IOM findings, this is not a new debate. Many
experts have told us that the health care industry is a decade or more
behind in utilizing new technologies to reduce medical errors. Just
last year, the HELP Committee took initial steps last year to reduce
medical errors through the reauthorization of the Agency for Healthcare
Research and Quality (AHRQ), revitalizing this agency as the
[[Page S5271]]
federal agency focused on improving the quality of health care in this
country. Part of the core mission of AHRQ is to further our
understanding of the causes of medical errors and the best strategies
we can employ to reduce these errors. The legislation authorized the
Director of AHRQ to conduct and support research; to build private-
public partnerships to identify the causes of preventable health care
errors and patient injury in health care delivery; to develop,
demonstrate, and evaluate strategies for reducing errors and improving
patient safety; and to disseminate such effective strategies throughout
the health care industry.
The legislation we introduce today builds upon the further
recommendations of the IOM report and reflects the culmination of
testimony received throughout the past several months in a series of
hearings held by the HELP Committee.
The central goal of this legislation is quality improvement
throughout the health care system. We heard over and over throughout
our hearings that we need to develop our knowledge base about the best
mechanisms to reduce medical errors. This can only be achieved if we
build a system where errors can be reported and understood to improve
care, not to punish individuals. We need to create a ``culture of
safety'' in which errors can be reported, and analyzed, and then change
can be implemented.
I will not go into the details of this legislation, which Senator
Jeffords has already outlined, I would simply outline the three main
goals of this legislation, the creation of a national center for
quality improvement and patient safety at the AHRQ, the creation of a
voluntary reporting system to collect and analyze medical errors, and
the establishment of strong confidentiality provisions for the
information submitted under quality improvement and medical error
reporting systems.
I am very supportive of the goals of this legislation and will
continue to examine the best ways to reduce medical errors in our
health care system. It is essential that we pass medical errors
legislation this year. We will continue to seek input from patients and
provider groups as we work to pass this legislation.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senator Kennedy in
sponsoring the ``Error Reduction and Improvement in Patient Safety
Act,'' legislation which will establish a national system to identify,
track and prevent medical errors.
Last November, the Institute of Medicine reported that between 44,000
and 98,000 deaths per year are attributable to medical errors, ranging
from illegible prescriptions to amputations of the wrong limb. In other
words, patients are being harmed not because of a failure of science or
medical knowledge, but because of the inability of our health care
system to mitigate common human mistakes.
Most Americans feel confident that the health care they receive will
make them better--or at the very least, not make them feel worse. And
in the vast majority of circumstances, that confidence is deserved. The
dedication, knowledge and training of our doctors, nurses, surgeons and
pharmacists in this country are unparalleled. But, as the IOM report
starkly notes, the quality of our health care system is showing some
cracks. If we are to maintain public confidence, we must respond
quickly and thoroughly to this crisis.
One thing is certain: the paradigm of individual blame that we've
been operating under discourages providers from reporting mistakes--and
thwarts efforts to learn from those mistakes. We have to move beyond
finger-pointing and encourage the reporting and analysis of medical
errors if we want to make real progress towards improving patient
safety.
This legislation will do just that. It authorizes the creation of a
national Center for Quality Improvement and Patient Safety to set and
track national patient safety goals and conduct and fund safety
research. The bill also sets up national non-punitive, voluntary, and
confidential reporting systems for medical errors. By analyzing and
learning from mistakes, we will be better able to determine what
systems and procedures are most effective in preventing errors in the
future.
Identification and analysis of errors is critical to improving the
quality of health care. But we must also develop measures of
accountability that ensure that the information that is generated by a
national error reporting system is actually used to improve patient
safety. Our bill takes those practices shown to be most effective in
preventing errors and creates a mechanism for integrating those
practices into federally-funded health care programs. These evidence-
based ``best practices'' will also be used as standards for health care
organizations seeking to participate in the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Program.
Mr. President, the ``Error Reduction and Improvement in Patient
Safety Act'' addresses the complex problem of medical errors in the
most comprehensive manner possible--from the identification of errors,
to the analysis of the errors, to the application of best practices to
prevent those errors from ever occurring again. Simply put, this
legislation will save lives. I look forward to working with my
colleagues to enact this legislation expeditiously, because frankly,
one medical error is one too many.
______
By Mr. ASHCROFT:
S. 2744. A bill to ensure fair play for family farms; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
the fair play for family farms act of 2000
S. 2745. A bill to provide for grants to assist value-added
agricultural businesses; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry.
the value-added development act for american agriculture
S. 2746. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a
credit against income tax for investment by farmers in value-added
agricultural property; to the Committee on Finance.
the farmers' value-added agricultural investment tax credit act
Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the concerns of
Missouri farmers and ranchers about concentration in the agriculture
sector and about individual farmers' ability to compete and to get fair
prices for their commodities.
Missouri is a ``farm state'', so ensuring fair competition in markets
is an important issue to me. The state of Missouri is ranked second in
the list of states with the most number of farms--only Texas has more.
Missouri's varying topography and climate makes for a very
agriculturally diverse state. Farmers and ranchers produce over 40
commodities, 22 of which are ranked in the top ten among the states.
Missouri is a leader in such crops as beef, soybeans, hay, and rice, as
well as watermelon and concord grapes. Having diversity and the ability
to change has allowed Missouri farmers to maintain their livelihood for
generations. More than 88 percent of the farms in Missouri are family
or individually owned, and 8 percent are partnerships. It is easy to
see that Missouri is a state that values small and family farms--which
are the bedrock of Missouri's rural communities.
As I have traveled around Missouri--visiting every county in the
state--Missouri farmers and ranchers have repeatedly told me that
increasing concentration of the processing and packing industry has
resulted--and will continue to result--in a less competitive market
environment and lower prices for producers.
I have been responding to these concerns, and I am taking further
action today. Last year, I asked the Department of Justice to create a
high-level post within the Antitrust Division to specialize in
agriculture-related mergers and transactions. The Administration
responded by appointing a representative for agriculture in the
Department of Justice. This appointment is a step in the right
direction, but producers still have multiple concerns that need to be
addressed.
Today, I am introducing three bills to address Missouri and American
farmers' concerns about agriculture concentration and market
competition. In addition to listening to Missouri farmers on this
issue, I have reviewed a resolution that was considered in the Missouri
State Legislature about competition in the agricultural economy.
The Ninetieth General Assembly of Missouri called upon the 106th
Congress to take an initiative on federal
[[Page S5272]]
law governing agriculture concentration. Missouri State Concurrent
Resolution 27 (S. Con. Res. 27) is a bipartisan resolution outlining
what the Missouri legislature recommends the federal government should
do to address the issue of concentration. The resolution passed the
Missouri State Senate and was reported out of the House Agriculture
Committee to the full House. In drafting the package of bills I am
introducing today, I studied the recommendations and objectives in
State Senator Maxwell's Missouri resolution as well as including
important provisions of my own.
Mr. President, the bill I'm introducing today--the Fair Play of
Family Farms Act--does the following things:
First, this legislation adds ``sunshine'' to the merger process. It
will give the Department of Agriculture more authority when it comes to
mergers and acquisitions. This will heighten USDA's role in review of
all proposed agriculture mergers so that the impact on farmers will be
given more consideration, and will make these reviews public. The
public will be given an opportunity to comment on the proposed merger,
and the USDA will be required to do an impact analysis on producers on
a regional basis. I want to ensure that if two agri-businesses merge,
the impact on farmers are completely evaluated.
Second, my bill creates a permanent position for an Assistant
Attorney General for Agricultural Competition. This position will not
simply be appointed by the President or by the Attorney General, but
the position will require Senate review and confirmation. Also, my bill
provides additional staffing for this new position.
In addition, this bill provides additional funds and requires the
Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyard Administration (GIPSA) to hire
more litigation attorneys, economists, and investigators to enforce the
Packers and Stockyard Act. An important element of this provision is
that it requires GIPSA to put more investigators out ``in the field''
for oversight and investigations. I want to make sure that there are
not just more attorneys and economists in Washington, D.C., but that
there are more people out doing investigations and oversight.
Because there has been some concerns that the Packers and Stockyards
Act does not cover the entire poultry industry, this legislation also
requires an analysis of why the poultry industry is not covered, and
requires GAO to offer suggestions for how the disparity between poultry
and livestock can be remedied.
This bill addresses another problem I was informed about when I was
out visiting Missouri farmers--and that is the issue of confidentiality
clauses in contracts signed by farmers. Several farmers were concerned
about confidentiality clauses in the contracts with agri-business that
they were told make it illegal for farmers to share the contract with
others, even their lawyers and bankers. I want to ensure that farmers
are able to get the legal and financial advice they need, so this bill
ensures that such confidentiality clauses do not apply to farmers'
contacts with their lawyers or bankers.
The bill also creates a statutory trust for the protection of
ranchers who sell on a cash basis to livestock dealers. Right now, if
ranchers deliver their cattle to a dealer and then the dealer goes
bankrupt, the rancher is not protected. My bill would set up a trust
for the rancher, so that if the dealer goes bankrupt, the rancher would
be at the front of the line to get paid. There are similar trusts
already set up for when a rancher sells livestock to a packer, and this
legislation extends the same protections to ranchers when they sell
their livestock to dealers.
One of the recommendations from the Missouri legislature that I
included in the bill allows GIPSA to seek reparations for producers
when a packer is found to be engaged in predatory or unfair practices.
This section specifies that when money is collected from those that are
damaging producers, the money should go to the farmers, not to the
federal government.
This bill will lead to a more fair playing field for Missouri farmers
and ranchers. It address concerns of Missourians that I have visited
with and incorporates the outline of the Missouri State Resolution.
Finally, I am pleased to be the Senate sponsor of two bills that have
already been introduced in the other Chamber by the distinguished
Representative from Missouri, Congressman Jim Talent. I would like to
commend Congressman Talent for the work he has done to help the
Missouri agriculture community. Representative Talent's bills on value
added agriculture are a positive step for Missouri and U.S. producers.
Therefore, I would like to introduce these two bills in the Senate to
``help put farmers back in the driver's seat.''
The Value-Added Development Act for American Agriculture provides
technical assistance for producers to start value-added ventures. This
bill helps family farmers compete by giving farmers the opportunity to
take a greater share of the profit from the processing industry. The
legislation will provide technical assistance to producers for value-
added ventures, including engineering, legal services, applied
research, scale production, business planning, marketing, and market
development.
The funds would be provided to farmers through grants requests, which
will be evaluated on the State level. It has long been my opinion that
farmers know how best to farm their land, meet market demands, and make
a profit. If the ideas of farmers are cultivated on a local and state
level, farmers will likely have more flexibility to make wise decisions
for markets in their home states and regions.
States would have the opportunity to apply for $10 million grants to
start up an Agriculture Innovation Center. The state boards will
consist of the State Department of Agriculture, the largest two general
farm organizations, and the four highest grossing commodity groups. The
Agriculture Innovation Center will then use the funds to help farmers
finance the start-up of value added ventures.
Once it is determined that the farmers' ideas for a value added
venture could be beneficial, the State Agriculture Innovation Center
can give the farmers assistance with plans, engineering, and design.
When the farmer is actually ready to begin implementation of the value
added project, the third bill I am introducing will help out.
The Farmers' Value-Added Agricultural Investment Tax Credit Act would
create a tax credit for farmers who invest in producer owned value-
added endeavors--even ventures that are not farmer-owned co-ops. This
would provide a 50% tax credit for the producers of up to $30,000 per
year, for six years.
The three bills I am introducing today are important to the
continuation of the American farmer over the next century. I know that
these bills will benefit the producers of Missouri, and in turn benefit
all of America.
____________________