[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 26 (Thursday, March 1, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1748-S1789]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Mr. Cleland, Mr. Cochran, Mr. 
        Wellstone, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Baucus, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Johnson, 
        Mr. Bunning, and Ms. Snowe):
  S. 421. A bill to give gifted and talented students the opportunity 
to develop their capabilities; to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I am reintroducing, with nine of 
our colleagues, the Gifted and Talented Students Education Act. It is 
vital

[[Page S1749]]

that we recognize the nearly three million students in the United 
States who are talented and gifted and provide them with a challenging 
education.
  Our nation depends on students who will become the next generation of 
leaders in business, economics, the sciences, medicine, and education. 
Our lives will be enriched by the next generation of performing and 
fine artists. However, many of our gifted and talented students are not 
being challenged to their fullest ability at school and, as a result, 
are not performing at world-class levels. Worse, many of our top 
students lose interest in school and abandon their education 
altogether. If these gifted students are not adequately challenged, 
they will direct their energy and gifts toward destructive and wasteful 
activities and become a burden to society, instead of the most 
productive contributors.
  The Gifted and Talented Students Education Act will help to ensure 
that gifted and talented students have the opportunity to achieve their 
highest potential by providing block grants, based on a state's student 
population, to state education agencies. These grants will be used to 
identify and provide educational services to gifted and talented 
students from all economic, ethnic, and racial backgrounds, including 
students with limited English proficiency and students with 
disabilities. The bill outlines four broad spending areas but leaves 
decisions on how best to serve these students to states and local 
school districts. The legislation ensures that the federal money 
benefits students by requiring the state education agency to distribute 
not less than 88 percent of the funds to schools and that the funds 
must supplement, not supplant, funds currently being spent. 
Additionally, rather than simply accepting federal funds for a new 
program, states must make their own commitment to these students by 
matching 20 percent of the federal funds. The matching requirements 
will help ensure that programs and services for gifted education 
develop a strong foothold in the state.
  Currently, the only support talented and gifted students receive from 
the federal government is through the successful research based Javits 
Gifted and Talented Students Education Program. One well-known effort 
is Project CUE, a collaborative effort that included the College of New 
Rochelle and School District 9 in the South Bronx, which serves 
approximately 32,000 mostly poor and minority students. The program was 
designed to institute high-level challenging content for elementary 
school students, and to identify and nurture those students whose 
interests and talents could be developed in mathematics and science. 
Evaluation of the project indicated a significant improvement in the 
overall academic achievement of those students identified as 
potentially gifted, as well as increases in school attendance rates. 
Furthermore, the project resulted in a twenty percent improvement 
school-wide in science and math achievement, as measured in both local 
and statewide standardized tests. Just imagine how ALL talented and 
gifted students could benefit from consistent funding and support to 
implement programs like the one in the South Bronx.
  Mr. President, our nation's gifted and talented students are among 
our great untapped resources. We must help states and local school 
districts provide a challenging education for these students so their 
particular gifts can flourish and be fully realized. It is my sincere 
hope that you and the rest of our colleagues will make this commitment 
to talented and gifted students this year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WELLSTONE (for himself, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Levin, and Ms. 
        Stabenow):
  S. 422. A bill to provide that, for purposes of certain trade 
remedies, imported semifinished steel slab shall be treated as like or 
directly competitive with taconite pellets; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I send a bill to the desk. This is a 
bill Senator Dayton and I are introducing today, and we are joined by 
Senators Levin and Stabenow.
  This legislation is a huge priority for Senator Dayton, and it is a 
huge priority for me. This is not abstract legislation. This is all 
about people whom we love and in whom we believe. This is about 
taconite. This is northeast Minnesota, the Iron Rangers. This is about 
our State.
  Senator Dayton and I are going to divide our time equally. I will 
follow Senator Dayton.
  Sometimes when we introduce legislation, it stays on the calendar, 
and other times we introduce legislation because we are determined in 
every way possible to look for ways to pass it, to work with the 
Department of Labor administratively on trade adjustment assistance.
  We are going to devote all of our efforts jointly to pass legislation 
and get some relief, some assistance for people who are going through 
such difficult times. I think our colleagues will support us in this 
effort. I yield the floor to Senator Dayton.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota, Mr. Dayton.
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I am proud to rise today to join with my 
very distinguished colleague and long-time friend, the senior Senator 
from Minnesota, Mr. Wellstone, to introduce with him the Taconite 
Workers Relief Act of 2001.
  That this legislation is even needed is a great American tragedy 
because this hard and dangerous work of iron ore mining and taconite 
production has bred a very special type of person. In Minnesota, we 
call them Iron Rangers. They are men and women who for generations have 
been hard-working, community-building, and patriotic Americans.
  The bitter irony in the title of this legislation is that these men 
and women do not want relief; they want work. Unfortunately, over the 
last 20 years, the trade policies of successive administrations have 
thrown thousands of them out of work, and they now threaten to 
extinguish the iron ore mining and taconite-producing industries in 
Minnesota entirely, as well as the basic steel-making industry 
throughout this country.

  Twenty years ago, this industry employed over 15,000 Minnesotans. 
Today, it is less than 5,000. Over 2,000 workers have been laid off in 
the last 2 years, and 1,400 of them come from one company, LTV, which 
has announced it is closing permanently.
  It is bad enough that U.S. trade policies have allowed, and even 
encouraged, this economic and social devastation which has caused 
immeasurable and unspeakable human devastation in northeastern 
Minnesota--broken lives, broken homes and families, severe depressions, 
even suicides. Yet adding the grievous offense to these terrible 
tragedies, the U.S. Government has also refused to allow these 
displaced workers the benefits, the job training, and other supports 
which Congress clearly intended when it passed the Trade Adjustment 
Assistance Act.
  In fact, the U.S. Department of Labor has consistently ruled that 
taconite pellets were not in direct competition with imports of 
semifinished steel or slab steel. That view is so ill-informed and 
absurd that it would be laughable if it were not for the further damage 
it has caused these already seriously harmed men and women. That makes 
such rulings inexcusable and trade adjustment assistance denials 
inhumane and even immoral.
  This legislation would make such denials illegal. It would establish 
the obvious: that the imports of semifinished steel, in addition to the 
continuous import of foreign steel and iron ore, are directly causing 
these job losses.
  It establishes that the illegal dumping of these products are within 
the province of the International Trade Commission which, I might add, 
is proven to be an ineffective protector of Minnesota industries and 
American jobs.
  This legislation, while needed to provide the assistance these 
workers need and deserve, is by no means a solution to the much larger 
problem of protecting this basic industry for the sake of our national 
economy, for the sake of our national security, and certainly for the 
sake of these dedicated men and women in Minnesota and elsewhere in the 
country who want to go to work, who want to earn a living, who want to 
contribute to the economic strength of this country and who, through 
misguided policies, are now being denied the opportunity to do so.
  I yield the floor to my colleague from Minnesota.

[[Page S1750]]

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that some 
letters from steelworkers and their families--without using last names, 
Barry, David, Lisa, Cliff, Joanne, and Lenore--be printed in the 
Record, along with a letter of support from John Swift, who is a 
commissioner of IRRRB, Jerry Fallos, USWA, which has just been ravaged 
by the LTV shutdown, Vince Lacer, who is mayor of the city of Aurora, 
and Richard Rojeski, USWA Local 2705, Chisholm, MN, along with letters 
from Louis Jondreau, Cleveland Cliffs Union Coordinator, and other 
letters of support from other steelworker local presidents throughout 
the range, along with a letter from David Foster, who is director of 
Steelworker District 11.
  There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

     To: The Honorable Senator Wellstone and Senator Dayton.
     From: Barry.

       Gentlemen: I am writing this letter to you in support of 
     receiving Trade Readjustment Allowance for those that have 
     been displaced because of illegally dumped steel. I would 
     like to tell you a little about my situation and myself. I am 
     married with 3 daughters 2 cats and one dog. I am 40 years 
     old, my wife Kathy is 41, my oldest daughter Jamie is 18, 
     Allycia is 13, and my youngest daughter is Alexandra. She 
     likes to be called Alex and is 7 years old. My oldest 
     daughter Jamie is currently going to college, which has also 
     stressed our financial situation. We are determined to get 
     her through college. We live in a little town called Gilbert, 
     MN. I have helped coach Babe Ruth Baseball and am on the 
     United Way board of directors. I feel I do whatever I can to 
     contribute to try to strengthen or support the community. I 
     guess that is why I feel compelled to write to you about our 
     situation.
       LTV Steel Mining is the company that I used to work for. 
     The reason that I say used to work for is because LTV Steel 
     Corporation has announced that they are permanently closing 
     our plant because they cannot compete with cheap dumped 
     imported steel. There were approximately 1500 full time 
     employees working there. Except for just a handful of 
     employees to shut down the plant, the rest have been laid off 
     including myself.
       I would hope that you could seriously consider promoting 
     TRA Benefits for those of us that are laid off. When I heard 
     the announcement last spring, I immediately enrolled and took 
     courses at a local junior college. Fall semester came and I 
     went into a 2-year course called Automated Control 
     Technologies. It was a struggle going to school full time, 
     working full time, and trying to spend time with my family. I 
     did it. I guess that I just want to show an example of my 
     sincerity in trying to educate myself for whatever job the 
     future may have for me. I really believe that I need an 
     education now in order to market myself for employment. I am 
     currently in the first year of a 2-year course. I would need 
     one more year to get my diploma. The graduation date would be 
     around June of 2002. I would need a monetary benefit to 
     support my family while I continue my education. Then I 
     promise you that once I finish school, I will be back into 
     the workforce.
       I know that everything costs money but I believe that this 
     would be a good investment. The human element is the most 
     important factor in this equation. The financial assistance 
     that we need would strengthen our small rural areas and renew 
     our will and spirit. The opportunity to get an education 
     would help us make our transition into another employment 
     area. I am 40 years old and this could be my last chance to 
     be retrained. I am ready to take on the challenge but we need 
     your help. Our fate and future are in your hands. Thank you 
     for taking the time out to listen to me.
           Sincerely,
     Barry and Family.
                                  ____

                                   United Steelworkers of America,


                                Local Union 4108, District 11,

                                                       Aurora, MN.
       Dave and Lisa are both in their mid thirties. They have two 
     daughters, Haley seven and Nadia four. Two years ago Dave 
     injured his back at work and now has a partial permanent 
     disability. Dave was permanently laid off Friday and will 
     start collecting unemployment in two weeks. Dave is only one 
     of hundreds of laid off steelworkers who are in desperate 
     need of retraining. Dave will be out of unemployment and 
     medical benefits in six months.
       Cliff and Joanne have two teenage children. Cliff has 
     twenty years of service with LTV. Cliff was permanently laid 
     off last week. In six months Cliff will run out of 
     unemployment benefits and will not have any health benefits 
     in one year. Cliff's wife was recently diagnosed with breast 
     cancer, their main concern is health insurance. With the 
     proper retraining, Cliff would be able to get a good job that 
     would help with health insurance.
       Lenore is a single parent of a teenage son. She was just 
     permanently laid off from LTV. Lenore has a high school 
     education and general labor type skills she acquired from 
     working at the mine. She realizes that without the 
     opportunity to get retrained, she will have a difficult time 
     trying to get a decent paying job.
       These are just a couple of examples of some of the 1400 
     people that will be impacted by the shutdown of LTV.
       As of today 797 employee's have applied for retraining 
     through The Office Of Job Training. There are 189 people that 
     are currently taking some type of retraining classes. The 
     USWA/LTV Career Development Center has paid out over 
     $50,000.00 in tuition assistance and has used up their budget 
     for the entire year already. At the rate the money is being 
     spent we are afraid the entire grant of 2.1 million dollars 
     that the Office Of Job Training received for the LTV workers, 
     will be used up before everyone has an opportunity to use it.
                                  ____

                                            Iron Range Resources &


                                         Rehabilitation Board,

                                   Eveleth, MN, February 27, 2001.
     Hon. Paul Wellstone,
     U.S. Senator, Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC.
     Hon. Mark Dayton,
     U.S. Senator,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. James Oberstar,
     U.S. Representative, Rayburn House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Wellstone, Senator Dayton and Congressman 
     Oberstar: I am writing to endorse the ``Taconite Workers' 
     Relief Act of 2001.'' Our agency believes it is of vital 
     importance that the taconite industry and its workers fully 
     benefit from our trade laws. The ``Taconite Workers' Relief 
     Act'' will enable Minnesota's working families on the Iron 
     Range to gain access to benefits and protections they need, 
     including Trade Adjustment Assistance.
       Every ton of semi-finished steel displaces 1.3 tons of 
     taconite in basic steel production. With U.S. imports of 
     semi-finished steel at all time highs and their prices at all 
     time lows, some domestic steel producers have turned to 
     dumped imports of steel slab, which has devastated the 
     taconite industry, and thousands of working families in 
     Minnesota. The injury caused by these imports is 
     unquestionable. Last month, production cutbacks ravaged the 
     U.S. iron ore industry: Northshore Mining Company announced 
     that it will cut 700,000 tons of production; U.S. Steel's 
     Minntac plant will cut 450,000 tons; the Hibbing Taconite 
     Company will cut 1.3 million tons of production; and LTV 
     Steel Mining Company closed its mining plant, permanently 
     eliminating 8 million tons of production and 1400 jobs.
       By all accounts, the taconite industry and its workers are 
     in crisis. We must enact the Taconite Workers Relief Act 
     immediately to protect and strengthen the industry and the 
     communities of northern Minnesota.
           Sincerely,
                                                       John Swift,
     Commissioner.
                                  ____

                                   United Steelworkers of America,


                                Local Union 4108, District 11,

                                    Aurora, MN, February 23, 2001.
       Dear Senators Wellstone, Dayton, and Congressman Oberstar: 
     I'm writing this letter on behalf of the 1200 employee's I 
     represent, that formally worked for LTV Steel Mining Company. 
     I can't begin to tell you how much your bill, the Taconite 
     Workers Relief Act, will mean to our members. As of today 900 
     employees were placed on permanent layoff. In six months 
     these people will be out of unemployment benefits and a lot 
     of them will be out of Health Benefits.
       As every one knows the continued flow of imported steel is 
     devastating not only the steel industry, but also the 
     taconite industry. The taconite plants in Minnesota and 
     across the country are in a crisis they may never recover 
     from. With the closure of LTV steel Mining Company and the 
     continued layoffs of miners from the six other mines it is 
     critical to the survival of the Iron Range that this 
     important piece of legislation gets passed. The benefits and 
     protection that would be gained from this, is a critical 
     piece of legislation to keep the people in Northern 
     Minnesota. If this legislation is adopted it will enable the 
     people to get the assistance and retraining they need to get 
     on with their lives. With the help of you and other 
     legislators, we can help prevent what happened in the early 
     80's, when there were massive layoffs across the range, and 
     people lost their homes, and families were torn apart.
       I know you have always said that our young people are our 
     greatest resource, with this legislation we can keep our 
     young people in Minnesota.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Jerry Fallos,
     President, Local 4108.
                                  ____



                                               City of Aurora,

                                    Aurora, MN, February 26, 2001.
     Senator Paul Wellstone,
     St. Paul, MN.
       Dear Senators Wellstone and Dayton and Congressman 
     Oberstar: I am writing to endorse the ``Taconite Workers' 
     Relief Act of 2001''. We believe it is of vital importance 
     that the taconite industry and its workers fully benefit from 
     our trade laws. The ``Taconite Workers' Relief Act of 2001'' 
     will enable Minnesota's working families on the Iron Range to 
     gain access to benefits and protections they need, including 
     Trade Adjustment Assistance.
       Every ton of semi-finished steel displaces 1.3 tons 
     taconite in basic steel production. With U.S. imports of 
     semi-finished steel at all time highs and their prices at all 
     time

[[Page S1751]]

     lows, domestic steel producers have turned to dumped imports 
     of steel slab, which has devastated the taconite industry, 
     and thousands of working families in Minnesota. The injury 
     caused by these imports is unquestionable. Last month, 
     production cutbacks ravaged the U.S. iron ore industry: 
     Northshore Mining Company announced that it will cut 700,000 
     tons of production; U.S. Steel's Minntac Plant will cut 
     450,000 tons; the Hibbing Taconite Company will cut 1.3 
     million tons of production; and LTV Steel Mining Company 
     closed its mining plant, permanently eliminating 8 million 
     tons of production and 1400 jobs.
       By all accounts, the taconite industry and its workers are 
     in crisis. We must enact the ``Taconite Workers Relief Act of 
     2001'' immediately to protect and strengthen the industry and 
     the communities of Northern Minnesota.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Vincent P. Lacer,
     Mayor.
                                  ____



                                              USWA Local 2705,

                                  Chisholm, MN, February 23, 2001.
     Senator Paul Wellstone,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Wellstone: I am writing to you today to thank 
     you and Senator Dayton for taking time out of your busy 
     schedules to come to the Iron Range and listen to our 
     concerns in the mining Industry. I would like to tell you 
     that I am in full support of the TAA recommendations and hope 
     that we can get this through the Senate.
       The importing of semi finished steel into this country is 
     detrimental to the economy of the Iron Range. We need to get 
     taconite pellets equal with semi-finished slabs and with the 
     bill that you are proposing on TAA recommendations I believe 
     will help the Taconite Industry and the Iron Range.
       Please continue to press our issue of unfairly imported or 
     dumped steel and semi-finished steel. With your help I know 
     that we will win this battle.
                                                  Richard Rojeski,
     President.
                                  ____



                               United Steelworkers of America,

                                  Chisholm, MN, February 23, 2001.
     Senator Paul Wellstone,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Wellstone: I am writing you today to thank you 
     and Senator Dayton for taking time out of your busy schedules 
     to come to the Iron Range and listen to our concerns about 
     the mining industry. I would like you to know that I am in 
     full support of the TAA recommendations and hope that we can 
     get this bill through the Senate.
       The importing of semi finished steel into this country is 
     detrimental to the Iron Range economy. We need to get 
     taconite pellets equal to semi-finished slabs and with the 
     bill that you are proposing on TAA recommendations I believe 
     will help the taconite industry and the Iron Range.
       Please continue to press our issue of unfairly imported or 
     dumped steel and semi-finished steel. With your help I know 
     that we will win this battle.
           Sincerely,
                                                Louis P. Jondreau,
     Cleveland Cliffs Union Coordinator.
                                  ____

                                             Local Union No. 6860,


                               United Steelworkers of America,

                                   Eveleth, MN, February 22, 2001.
       Dear Senator Wellstone: I am writing this letter in support 
     of the new legislation that you, Sen. Dayton and Rep. 
     Oberstar are introducing into the Senate and House of 
     Representatives on the illegal dumping of imports of semi-
     finished steel into the U.S. market.
       As you know, in June of 1999, EVTAC Mining laid off approx. 
     150 Bargaining Unit employees because of the illegal dumping 
     of imports of semi-finished steel into the U.S. market. I 
     attempted, thru your office and Rep. Oberstar's office to get 
     TAA/TRA benefits and was denied three (3) different times by 
     the Dept. of Labor because Pellets were considered to be not 
     alike, the same or not in direct competition with the imports 
     of semi-finished steel. At least half of these employees are 
     still in need of these benefits yet today.
       This law could change this or at least help other employees 
     in the future.
       I will do everything I can to help you, Sen. Dayton and 
     Rep. Oberstar get this Bill passed.
       Please feel free to call if I can help.
           In Solidarity,
                                                 Samuel H. Ricker,
     President.
                                  ____

                                   United Steelworkers of America,


                                                 District #11,

                               Minneapolis, MN, February 27, 2001.
     Senator Paul Wellstone,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Wellstone: I am writing to express my strong 
     support for your introduction of the Taconite Workers' Relief 
     Act which is designed to correct certain longstanding 
     inequities in American trade laws as they apply to the unique 
     situation of Minnesota and Michigan iron ore miners.
       As you know, northern Minnesota was settled over 100 years 
     ago by immigrant miners recruited from over 30 different 
     countries to mine what were then known as the world's richest 
     deposits of iron ore. The Mesabi Range fueled the industrial 
     development of North America throughout the 20th Century, 
     provided the raw material for the steel that won two world 
     wars, and contributed to building many of the nation's great 
     industrial fortunes. It likewise was typical of the ethnic 
     melting pots that created the archetypal American 
     communities--governed by strong family values, a sense of 
     fair play, self-reliance, and a belief that working together 
     we could shape our own future as we wished.
       The steelworkers who go to work every day in Minnesota's 
     iron ore mines, drilling, blasting, digging, hauling, 
     crushing, and refining millions of tons of taconite ore still 
     do so under remarkably harsh conditions. Twenty-four hours a 
     day, 365 days a year, working on graveyard shifts in wind 
     chills of 60 degrees below zero in the winter, as their 
     parents, grandparents and great-grandparents did, our members 
     are men and women with stamina and grit. We have always felt 
     capable of standing up for our families and ourselves.
       But now we need our government to stand up for our jobs and 
     our communities. Without the enactment of federal legislation 
     that prevents the illegal dumping of semi-finished steel 
     products in the U.S. which destroy the market for the iron 
     ore we mine, our jobs will be lost and our communities will 
     die. We need the Taconite Workers' Relief Act to be passed 
     immediately.
       Thank you for your efforts on our behalf.
           Sincerely,
                                                     David Foster,
     Director.
                                  ____



                                              City of Biwabik,

                                                      Biwabik, MN.
       Dear Senators Wellstone and Dayton and Congressman 
     Oberstar: I am writing to endorse the ``Taconite Workers' 
     Relief Act of 2001.'' We believe it is of vital importance 
     that the taconite industry and its workers fully benefit from 
     our trade laws. The ``Taconite Workers' Relief Act'' will 
     enable Minnesota's working families on the Iron Range to gain 
     access to benefits and protections they need, including Trade 
     Adjustment Assistance.
       Every ton of semi-finished steel displaces 1.3 tons of 
     taconite in basic steel production. With U.S. imports of 
     semi-finished steel at all time highs and their prices at all 
     time lows, domestic steel producers have turned to dumped 
     imports of steel slab, which has devastated the taconite 
     industry, and thousands of working families in Minnesota. The 
     injury caused by these imports is unquestionable. Last month, 
     production cutbacks ravaged the U.S. iron ore industry: 
     Northshore Mining Company announced that it will cut 700,000 
     tons of production, U.S. Steel's Minntac plant will cut 
     450,000 tons; Hibbing Taconite Company will cut 1.3 million 
     tons of production; and LTV Steel Mining Company closed its 
     mining plant, permanently eliminating 8 million tons of 
     production and 1400 jobs.
       As you may or may not know, this not only impacts the 
     direct employees of the taconite industry, but equally as 
     great the families, vendors, schools and communities that are 
     affected by these layoffs, production cutbacks and shutdowns. 
     This is an issue of today, not tomorrow.
       By all accounts, the taconite industry and its workers are 
     in crisis. We must enact the Taconite Workers' Relief Act 
     immediately to protect and strengthen the industry and the 
     communities of Northern MN.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Steve Bradach,
     Mayor.
                                  ____

                                   United Steelworkers of America,


                                                   Local 6115,

                                                     Virginia, MN.
       To whom it may concern: As a representative of workers at a 
     northern Minnesota mining operation, I feel you should know 
     the devastation on the lives of hard working individuals and 
     their families when our industry is shrinking, because of 
     unfairly traded steel and slabs. The downsizing of the steel 
     industry is a result of unfairly traded imports and we (the 
     mining industry) are doubly hit because of dumped slabs 
     coming into this country. Why won't an administration or law 
     help us or protect us with the same types of laws as the 
     other end of our industry? On behalf of our membership, I 
     would like to express our urgent support of Senator 
     Wellstone's ``Taconite Import Injury Adjustment Act of 
     2001.''
           Sincerely,
                                                      Marty Henry,
     President.
                                  ____

                                          Upper Peninsula Building


                                               Trades Council,

                                 Marquette, MI, February 28, 2001.
     Re: Taconite Workers Relief Act.

     Hon. Paul Wellstone,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Wellstone: I want to go on record thanking you 
     for introducing the Taconite Workers Relief Act. You well 
     know the various consequences resulting from the Free Market 
     Free-for-All occurring in the unprotected Steel Industry. Not 
     the least of these consequences are the hardships that come 
     down on the workers and their families who mine iron ore, the 
     basic ingredient in steel production.
       Those of us who provide construction services to the mines 
     also lose out when the profiteers dump steel, import cheap 
     iron ore, or otherwise take market steps that destroy our 
     basic industries in the united States. Our situation in the 
     Upper Peninsula of Michigan is that workers in the 
     construction industry

[[Page S1752]]

     will also suffer along with mining families as our steel and 
     iron ore industries are decimated by imports of one kind or 
     another.
       There is another related side issue that bothers me, too. 
     What happens to our national defense capabilities when the 
     United States no longer has the capacity to produce high 
     grade steel, has no iron ore industry remaining, and perhaps, 
     no longer has a friendly relationship with those who produce 
     steel? Would that scenario not invite belligerence from our 
     enemies?
       Thank you, Senator Wellstone, for your concern for all 
     workers.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jon G. LaSalle,
     Field Representative.
                                  ____



                                        Stand Up For Iron Ore,

                                Ishperning, MI, February 28, 2001.
     Hon. Paul Wellstone,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Wellstone: I applaud your introduction of the 
     Taconite Workers Relief Act and offer you the full support 
     and encouragement of our organization, Stand Up For Iron Ore. 
     Your legislation will go a long way toward resolving the 
     problems we have come together to work on. As iron ore miners 
     and managers, vendors and suppliers, political and community 
     leaders we all have a stake in ensuring that our industry is 
     treated equally when trade cases are considered.
       The iron ranges in Michigan and Minnesota have long been 
     integral to that basic foundation of America's industrial 
     might, the steel industry. For over one hundred and fifty 
     years vibrant communities have grown up around the mines. 
     Miners have worked under dangerous, grueling conditions to 
     support their families. Mining companies and employees have 
     paid the taxes that support government efforts Keewatin to 
     Washington.
       I find it unconscionable that our industry has been ignored 
     as the impact of illegally traded steel has reverberated 
     through the economy. I thank you for attempting to rectify 
     this situation and I will do all I can to assist in rallying 
     support for your efforts.
           Respectfully,
                                                       Mike Prusi,
                                                      Coordinator.

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I thank Senator Dayton. This Taconite 
Workers Relief Act that we are introducing is also being introduced in 
the House of Representatives today by Congressman Oberstar.
  This legislation has two central objectives. The first is to make 
sure the taconite workers in the Iron Range in Minnesota, and taconite-
producing regions in Michigan, are eligible for trade adjustment 
assistance. The second provision says that the taconite industry and 
its workers should be fully brought under trade laws that, if enforced, 
provide some protection for our working families: section 201 cases, 
antidumping cases, and countervailing duty cases. I would like to take 
those one at a time.
  On trade adjustment assistance, I could not be more in agreement with 
my colleague, Senator Dayton, from Minnesota. The argument that has 
been made is that our taconite workers are not in competition with slab 
steel or semifinished steel and that could not be further from the 
truth in this highly integrated steel industry. We want to make sure we 
get this trade adjustment assistance to people, and the sooner the 
better. This is a matter of lifeline support. This is a matter of 
enabling a worker or workers to go to school, to get additional 
training, to have some support, to be able to keep their families 
going. It is unconscionable--I think Senators, Democrats and 
Republicans, will agree--that taconite workers now are not getting this 
protection.
  We will make the direct appeal to Secretary of Labor Chao, who seems 
to me to be a very good person--agree or disagree on policies--because 
I still think, Senator Dayton, that the Department of Labor can 
administratively provide this support. It has been done before. We hope 
it can be done again. We will make the direct appeal. We will work very 
hard at this administratively.
  But if we cannot do it that way, we will come out on the floor of the 
Senate with an amendment, with a separate bill--however we best do it--
to make sure we can get this trade adjustment assistance for taconite 
workers in Minnesota and in Michigan as well.
  The other part of it deals with the whole question of trade laws and 
making sure for taconite workers--and, for that matter, steelworkers in 
general, because they are not, Senator Dayton, getting the protection 
they deserve right now--that we really apply section 201 and really 
look at the whole problem of other countries illegally dumping steel 
and semifinished steel on our market way below the cost of production; 
and our taking action.
  What is Government for, if not to be on the side of hard-working 
people. I say to my colleagues, you will not find a stronger work ethic 
or a group of citizens who work harder than those on the Iron Range. 
You cannot if you go anywhere in the country. The taconite workers fit 
everything we say on the floor of the Senate about what we think is 
important about America. They are people who work, work under tough 
conditions, are absolutely committed to supporting their families, and 
through no fault of their own they are out of work.
  So I say to Senator Dayton, and I would like to go back and forth 
with him in discussion in the time we have, I would say this is a 
short-run solution and then we will be trying to get to the bottom of 
this. In the short run, we want to make sure the assistance is there 
for the taconite workers. This is about survival. This is about 
supporting people who desperately need the help.
  The other thing we want to do is get it right on trade on the Iron 
Range in Minnesota, and I am sure the same is true for Michigan. 
Frankly, I think about steelworkers and think about auto workers and I 
think about industrial workers all across our country. Our workers are 
not asking for any kind of isolationist policy. Our workers are more 
than willing to compete in an international economy. But we want trade 
laws that give us a level playing field.
  When you have a situation where you have really what amounts to 
illegal dumping of cheap semifinished steel or steel on the market or 
when you have children working under deplorable working conditions, 
with nothing done about that, we have to figure out a way that this new 
global economy works for working people--works for working people in 
Brazil, works for working people in Russia, works for working people in 
South Korea, but also works for working people in the Iron Range of 
Minnesota and all across our country.
  We are committed to both fronts. I say to Senator Dayton, initially 
we want to get this assistance to people right away, immediately. Then 
we want to get colleagues engaged in this debate on trade policy which 
is so important when it comes to what crucially affects the lives of 
people.
  I ask my colleague from Minnesota, if I can, whether he would be 
willing to reflect with me on the floor of the Senate on some of the 
meetings he has had in the range, just some of the conversations with 
people and what this all means to Iron Rangers in personal terms. What 
has been your experience meeting with steelworkers and others? I ask my 
colleague that question.
  Mr. DAYTON. I agree with you, Senator Wellstone. People up there are 
suffering enormously because of these tragedies. To look in their 
faces, to see the pain and suffering, to see fathers and mothers who 
cannot support their families, who are losing not only their homes but 
their jobs and way of life--as you know, Senator, thousands of people 
from across the Iron Range have had to leave the area where they were 
born, where their families have lived for generations, because they 
cannot find work there.
  We are losing especially the youngest. In fact, part of a whole 
generation of Minnesotans have had to leave the Iron Range because of 
the lack of job opportunities. The average age of a citizen now in 
northeastern Minnesota is over the age of 55. Over half the citizens 
who reside there are senior citizens. This kind of devastation is 
really unspeakable, unfair, and, as I say, it is a consequence of over 
20 years of what I believe are misguided trade policies.
  I agree with my distinguished colleague, the senior Senator from 
Minnesota, that we should be looking forward to working with the new 
Secretary of Labor, the new ambassador, and the international trade 
ambassador. They are not the architects of these policies. Hopefully, 
with a new administration, we can work together because at least the 
trade adjustment assistance benefits, the program itself--this is 
clearly, precisely what was intended by Congress when it was passed. It 
is just unconscionable that it has not been provided administratively 
already.
  I agree with you that should be an option. But in the broader context 
of these policies, before these industries are wiped out in the United 
States, I

[[Page S1753]]

hope the administration will take a serious look at them. I yield back 
to my colleague.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I say to my colleague, he is absolutely right. There 
have been a number of meetings I have been at and I know the same 
applies to Senator Dayton. I can remember one. It was right before 
Christmas. It was a meeting in Aurora. There were a lot of people 
there, a lot of the steelworkers, taconite workers, and also some of 
their families. I was asking people, besides legislation, what else can 
be done? This is the first time this has ever happened in the Iron 
Range, at least in the 20 or 25 years I have been up there. Senator 
Dayton, this one fairly young worker stood up and he said: We need help 
for Christmas presents.

  I never heard that before. When people were working, they made good 
wages and had health care benefits. Now they are worried about 
presents.
  On the other issue that we are going to come up with, I don't know 
what the position of the administration will be. I think the Clinton 
administration was not strong enough at all. I am very skeptical about 
where the Bush administration is going to go, but we are going to push 
very hard, and where we can cooperate with them, we will do so; no 
question about it.
  One of the terrible issues when we get to the bankruptcy bill soon is 
that for younger workers, next to losing their jobs, the next worst 
thing is health care. You are losing your job, but then you are scared 
to death about what is going to happen to health care coverage with 
your children.
  For the younger workers who have been laid off in the case of the LTV 
mine shutting down, in a few months, they lose their health benefits; 
for the older workers who have worked a little longer, 1 year.
  Maybe the Senator would want to respond to this.
  Then there are the retirees. What I heard from the retirees was they 
are terrified LTV will file for chapter 7 and walk away from any health 
care. A lot of those retirees--too many I think--are struggling with 
cancer.
  Did the Senator find that people were talking about health care as 
well when he met with them, and does he think that is yet another issue 
we ought to focus on?
  Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I agree with Senator Wellstone. He points 
to a couple of other failures of our society. As he said, there is a 
lack of health coverage for families when someone loses their job 
through no choice or fault of their own. That is one of the great 
travesties of this situation. It takes what is an already awful 
situation and makes it even more destructive to an individual. It is 
bad enough when people can't afford Christmas presents, but then they 
cannot afford to take their child to a doctor and cannot afford to have 
their own health problems diagnosed on a timely basis. When they cannot 
afford to get surgery, then it becomes a problem this country and 
society should not allow.
  I underscore the Senator's point that he made a short while ago. 
There was a janitor's position that opened up to take care of all sorts 
of restrooms and everything else in one of the county buildings and, 
that paid less than $7 an hour. There were over 300 applicants for that 
one position.
  It underscores again how hard it is for people who want to work and 
are willing to work at anything rather than take a handout and relief.
  It is basic humanity to offer assistance.
  Again, I hope to work with the Senator so that we can pass this 
legislation. The administration must acknowledge their failure to 
provide assistance to the men and women of the Iron Range who want to 
contribute to the economic strength of this country.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I look forward to working with my 
colleague, Senator Dayton, on this. I think two Senators from the same 
State who care deeply about people who are really hurting and who love 
northeastern Minnesota are going to give this every bit of effort. I am 
really looking forward to working with the Senator on this. I so much 
want to help people.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleagues 
from Michigan and Minnesota in sponsoring the Taconite Workers Relief 
Act of 2001. This is an important piece of legislation for the future 
of our States' taconite iron ore mines and their employees which are 
facing a severe import crisis that is threatening to put them out of 
business. Enactment of this legislation will simply allow an industry 
providing a key input into finished steel to use existing trade laws to 
fight back against harmful import surges and dumped steel as other 
sectors of the steel industry may currently do under existing trade 
law.
  Taconite, iron ore, is an input into basic steel production and is 
displaced when semi-finished steel slab are imported. For example, one 
ton of semi-finished steel displaces 1.3 tons of iron ore in basic 
steel production.
  Unfairly traded steel imports are overwhelming U.S. production, 
threatening to endanger both our national defense and manufacturing 
base. Recently, steel producers have found it cheaper to import semi-
finished steel slabs than to make it themselves using iron ore from 
Michigan's Upper Peninsula and Minnesota. Unfortunately, if our 
taconite mines are overwhelmed by cheap imports and driven to 
bankruptcy, we will lose our capacity to make steel without depending 
on foreign sources of semi-finished steel. In effect, if we lose our 
taconite mining industry, we lose our domestic integrated steel 
manufacturing capabilities. For national security reasons, I don't 
think that is something we want to do.
  This crisis particularly impacts Michigan and Minnesota. The taconite 
iron ore mines located there are a foundation of the economies in the 
communities where they are located. To make matters worse, the iron ore 
industry faces a unique problem in trying to combat these harmful and 
unfair trade practices. Although its workers are losing their jobs to 
cheap and probably illegally dumped imports, they cannot fight back 
using our trade laws that were specifically designed to deal with these 
situations.
  This is because of how our trade laws have been interpreted in the 
past and the failure to recognize the U.S. iron ore industry's standing 
to file import relief cases against foreign producers of semi-finished 
steel. For example, under previous interpretations of U.S. trade laws, 
iron ore is not considered an article that is ``like or directly 
competitive'' with an imported article that is found to be a 
substantial cause of serious injury, or threat, to the domestic 
industry, even though it is a key input in making finished steel. This 
is clearly an oversight that should be corrected. The bill we are 
introducing today will achieve that goal.
  This legislation would ensure that the taconite industry and its 
employees fully benefit from the protection of section 201, anti-
dumping and countervailing duties laws as well as making its displaced 
employees eligible for Trade Adjustment Assistance. It does this by 
designating Taconite pellets as ``like or directly competitive with 
semi-finished steel slab'' for the purposes of eligibility for TAA and 
Section 201 remedies. It also would consider imported semi-finished 
steel slab eligible for countervailing duties, CVD, which are duties 
intended to provide relief to a domestic industry, taconite, that has 
been injured by subsidized imports, such as semi-finished steel, and 
for anti- dumping remedies.
  I hope the Senate will recognize the fairness in giving parity to a 
critical sector of the steel industry that has been overlooked in the 
past and should not be forgotten now. There is too much at stake to let 
this industry go under.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Smith of Oregon, and Mrs. Murray):
  S. 423. A bill to amend the Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the 
establishment of Fort Clatsop National Memorial in the State of Oregon, 
and for other purposes''; to the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the Fort 
Clatsop National Memorial Expansion Act of 2001 with my friends and 
colleagues, Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon and Senator Patty Murray 
from Washington.
  The Fort Clatsop Memorial marks the spot where Meriwether Lewis, 
William Clark, and the Corps of Discovery

[[Page S1754]]

spent 106 days during the winter of 1805. The bicentennial of their 
historic journey is fast approaching. It is estimated that over a 
quarter-million people will visit the memorial during the bicentennial 
years of 2003 though 2006. Despite this anticipated influx of visitors, 
the memorial is legally limited to be no larger than 130 acres. This 
legislation would authorize a boundary expansion of the memorial up to 
1500 acres and will therefore help accommodate the increasing number of 
visitors expected during the Lewis and Clark Bicentennial. The bill 
also authorizes a study of the national significance of Station Camp, 
another Lewis and Clark stopping point in 1805, located in Washington 
State.
  Since the 1980s, the United States Park Service in Astoria, OR has 
been negotiating with Willamette Industries to acquire approximately 
928 acres for the expansion of the Ft. Clatsop National Memorial. These 
acres are integral to the interpretation and enjoyment of the 
memorial's historic site. The Park Service and Willamette Industries 
have reached an agreement that will enable the Park Service to acquire 
this property. However, this legislation is necessary to authorize the 
expansion of the memorial's boundary before any additional lands can be 
acquired.
  The Park Service has targeted the expansion of the Fort Clatsop 
Memorial as one of its highest priorities. The Clatsop County 
Commission supports this legislation, as do the local landowners in and 
around the memorial. In addition, I have heard from the National Parks 
and Conservation Association NPCA, the Trust for Public Lands, and the 
Conservation Fund, all of whom support this effort to expand the Ft. 
Clatsop Memorial.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this legislation 
because the protection of this important American historic area will 
enable us to illustrate the story of Oregon and America's western 
expansion for all who visit this special place. I ask unanimous consent 
that the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 423

       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 ``Fort Clatsop National 
     Memorial Expansion Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) In 1805, the members of the Lewis and Clark Expedition 
     built Fort Clatsop at the mouth of the Columbia River near 
     Astoria, Oregon, where they spent 106 days waiting for the 
     end of winter and preparing for their journey home. The Fort 
     Clatsop National Memorial was created by Congress in 1958 for 
     the purpose of commemorating the culmination, and the winter 
     encampment, of the Lewis and Clark Expedition following its 
     successful crossing of the North American continent, and is 
     the only National Park Service site solely dedicated to the 
     Lewis and Clark expedition.
       (2) The 1995 General Management Plan for the Fort Clatsop 
     National Memorial, prepared with input from the local 
     community, calls for the addition of lands to the memorial to 
     include the trail used by expedition members to travel from 
     the fort to the Pacific Ocean and to include the shore and 
     forest lands surrounding the fort and trail to protect their 
     natural settings.
       (3) The area near present day McGowan, Washington where 
     Lewis and Clark and the Corps of Discovery camped after 
     reaching the Pacific Ocean, performed detailed surveying, and 
     conducted the historic ``vote'' to determine where to spend 
     the winter, is of undisputed national significance.
       (4) The National Park Service and State of Washington 
     should identify the best alternative for adequately and cost 
     effectively protecting and interpreting the ``Station Camp'' 
     site.
       (5) Expansion of the Fort Clatsop National Memorial would 
     require Federal legislation because the size of the memorial 
     is currently limited by statute to 130 acres.
       (6) Congressional action to allow for the expansion of Fort 
     Clatsop for both the trail to the Pacific and, possibly, the 
     Station Camp site would be both timely and appropriate before 
     the start of the national bicentennial celebration of the 
     Lewis and Clark Expedition planned to take place during the 
     years 2004 through 2006.

     SEC. 3. ACQUISITION OF LANDS FOR FORT CLATSOP NATIONAL 
                   MEMORIAL.

       The act entitled ``An Act to provide for the establishment 
     of Fort Clatsop National Memorial in the State of Oregon, and 
     for other purposes'', approved May 29, 1958 (Chapter 158; 72 
     Stat. 153), is amended--
       (a) by inserting in section 2 ``(a)'' before ``The 
     Secretary''.
       (b) by inserting in section 2 a period, ``.'', following 
     ``coast'' and by striking the remainder of the section.
       (c) by inserting in section 2 the following new 
     subsections:
       ``(b) The Memorial shall also include the lands depicted on 
     the map entitled `Fort Clatsop Boundary Map', numbered and 
     dated `405-80016-CCO-June-1996'. The area designated in the 
     map as a `buffer zone' shall not be developed but shall be 
     managed as a visual buffer between a commemorative trail that 
     will run through the property, and contiguous private land 
     holdings.
       ``(c) The total area designated as the Memorial shall 
     contain no more than 1,500 acres.''
       (d) by inserting at the end of section 3 the following:
       ``(b) Such lands included within the newly expanded 
     boundary may be acquired from willing sellers only, with the 
     exception of corporately owned timberlands.''

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF STUDY OF STATION CAMP.

       The Secretary of the Interior shall conduct a study of the 
     area known as ``Station Camp'' near McGowan, Washington, to 
     determine its suitability, feasibility, and national 
     significance, for inclusion into the National Park System. 
     The study shall be conducted in accordance with Section 8 of 
     Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-5).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 424. A bill to provide incentives to encourage private sector 
efforts to reduce earthquake losses, to establish a national disaster 
mitigation program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, my thoughts go out today to the people 
of Washington as they assess the damage and begin recovery from the 
earthquake there yesterday afternoon.
  Yesterday's event is a reminder that earthquakes are a national 
problem, and one that can strike at any time, without warning.
  It is in this light that I introduce, today, the Earthquake Loss 
Reduction Act of 2001. This bill provides incentives to encourage 
responsible state and local governments, individuals, and businesses to 
invest in damage prevention measures before an earthquake strikes. It 
is an ``ounce of prevention'' that will save the federal treasury, 
homeowners, businesses, and state and local governments the ``pound of 
cure'' for relief and recovery.
  The legislation builds on the excellent work of our nation's earth 
scientists and engineers by making implementation of loss reduction 
measure a federal priority. We know where earthquake hazards exist, 
which buildings and utility and transportation systems are most 
vulnerable, and what the consequences will be to public safety, 
community character, and our economy if an earthquake strikes. We also 
know how to reduce losses. Guidelines exist that provide rational, 
common sense approaches to upgrade weak facilities.
  The challenge as we enter the 21st century is to put this knowledge 
to work to reduce future losses, and improving the safety of Americans 
and the performance of privately and publicly owned buildings and 
facilities. The time to implement our knowledge is now.
  There is no question that mitigation efforts save dollars and lives 
in the long run. It worries me greatly that the President, in his 
Budget, proposes a cut to existing mitigation efforts.
  First, the President proposes eliminating the Project Impact program. 
Project Impact is the nation's premier disaster prevention initiative. 
Communities use Project Impact funds to retrofit hospitals and schools, 
to create flood barriers, and to help shore-up communities against any 
number of other possible natural disasters.
  California has eight Project Impact communities, and has used Project 
Impact funds to stabilize emergency facilities and other important 
structures. Local communities do not always have the resources to 
mitigate these facilities on their own.
  There are two other proposals in President Bush's budget that are 
cause for alarm.
  1. The President's budget outline assumes $83 million in FEMA savings 
by including a public buildings disaster insurance requirement, phased 
in over three years. This provision would mean that public entities 
like the U.C. system would have to have insurance on ALL structures 
before they could apply for federal assistance in the event of a 
disaster.
  This proposal simply is not feasible for states like California. 
Insurance companies in California do not offer

[[Page S1755]]

disaster insurance or, specifically, earthquake insurance.
  It will be interesting to see how the cities affected by the 
Washington earthquake would be affected by this rule. Insurance 
companies in Washington do offer earthquake insurance and will be 
paying-out over the coming months. It will be interesting to see if the 
insurers are able to withstand the costs.
  2. The budget also proposes reducing from 75 percent to 50 percent 
the federal share of funding for hazard mitigation grants. Once again, 
this is simply not feasible in California. California public 
institutions would not be able to afford 50 percent of clean-up costs 
after a major earthquake. It would be difficult for them to pay even 25 
percent, which is current law.
  These two provisions could cause my State, and others, great harm if 
enacted. I am prepared to fight them, and I will.
  The United States Geological Survey tells us there are 40 states and 
five territories with a moderate or higher earthquake risk. Entire 
metropolitan areas in these states and territories are at risk of being 
crippled by earthquake damage because existing buildings and 
infrastructure were built without appropriate seismic requirements.
  Areas lying outside ``earthquake zones'' are also affected. Even 
localized damage threatens complex economic systems and the magnitude 
of federal disaster aid. Let me give you a few examples of potential 
losses estimated by FEMA's regional earthquake loss estimation model, 
HAZUS.
  A magnitude of 7.0 earthquake on California's Newport-Inglewood fault 
running through the Los Angeles basin could cause an estimated $80 
billion in losses. Damage to buildings and business interruption would 
affect Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Ventura, and San 
Diego Counties. About 58 percent of the damage would be to residential 
buildings, displacing about 400,000 people. An estimated 100,000 people 
would need shelter.
  A magnitude 7.0 earthquake on the Hayward fault running along the 
east side of the San Francisco Bay could cause about $37 billion in 
damage. About 56 percent of the damage would be to residential 
buildings, displacing about 140,000 people. More than half of the 
losses would stem from damage to wood-frame homes and small business 
buildings.
  A magnitude 7.5 earthquake on the Border Ranges fault near Anchorage, 
AK could cause about $5 billion in losses. Anchorage, a city of about 
260,000 people, would suffer most of the damage. More than 60 percent 
of the damage would be to wood-frame buildings serving as homes and 
small businesses.
  A magnitude 7.2 earthquake on the Wasatch fault on the east side of 
Salt Lake City could cause about $13 billion in losses to the eight 
counties in that region. Most of the damage, about $11 billion, would 
occur in Salt Lake County. Throughout the region, about 150,000 people 
would be displaced, nearly 38,000 would require shelter, and nearly $10 
billion of the losses would result from damage and disruption to 
residential buildings.
  As large as these estimates seem, the actual losses could be even 
greater. Make no mistake, earthquakes will strike these regions and 
others, we just do not know when. In each estimate, over half of the 
losses are expected to come from residential buildings. Most vulnerable 
residential buildings can be upgraded for reasonable levels of 
expenditures. The incentives proposed in this bill could make it 
happen.
  While it is too early to determine the extent of the damage of 
yesterday's earthquake in Washington, taking a look at the losses from 
the 1994 earthquake in Northridge, CA. The direct losses from that 
quake totaled more than $44 billion. For all disasters declared since 
1989, FEMA has paid nearly $28 billion in disaster assistance for 
repairs to public buildings and infrastructure and for humanitarian 
aid. FEMA's outlay for Northridge alone represents 25 percent of this 
12-year aggregate figure, approximately $7 billion.
  You and I know that supplemental relief funds disrupt carefully 
planned budget decisions and undermine on-going programs. For some 
people, reducing recurring demands for federal disaster aid may be 
reason enough to support this bill, but there are more compelling 
reasons.
  The cost and consequences of earthquakes are painful to the victims, 
both individuals and businesses. The plight of those in the disaster 
area may be obvious, but the effects extend outside of the disaster 
area, often across state borders affecting those who depend on damaged 
businesses and affected customers. The American economy depends on 
closely linked businesses, suppliers of raw materials and components, 
manufacturers, transporters, and marketers. Worldwide competitors seek 
the market share of American business when a disaster disrupts our 
economy.
  Research from the Northridge earthquake indicates that even when 
businesses did not suffer direct damage in that quake, their presence 
in or near areas of wide-spread damage or disruption caused economic 
hardship. Economic losses can be large and have long-term effects on 
the future of businesses and regions. Simply put, earthquake loss 
reduction efforts improve the sustainability of American businesses.
  What we need is a widespread investment in loss reduction by many 
parties, not just the federal government. Responsibility for earthquake 
safety rests with state and local government, individuals, and 
companies. The federal role I advocate is one of leadership backed by 
incentives to inform and motivate those responsible to implement loss-
reduction actions. The result I seek is reduced pain and suffering, and 
more sustainable communities and businesses.
  The Federal Government is already contributing to earthquake disaster 
prevention. In a little over twenty years, our National Earthquake 
Hazard Reduction Program has sponsored research and development 
activities in earth sciences and engineering and has produced the 
knowledge and tools, such as the HAZUS estimates I noted earlier, we 
need to reduce our risk. If we are to reduce losses, however, we must 
put this knowledge to work.
  Reducing earthquake losses depends on the actions of millions of 
individual decision-makers, homeowners, business owners, and government 
officials. Many successful measures are easy to implement, but may seem 
expensive when considering competing demand for funds between immediate 
issues and the perceived low probability threat of an earthquake. The 
incentives in this bill provide good reasons to undertake loss 
reduction efforts. This bill will move knowledge from the laboratory to 
the community. The bill recognizes that shared responsibility for 
prevention means that those responsible for the facilities at risk 
accept responsibility for reducing the risk.
  This legislation does the following:
  1. It provides a credit against federal income taxes equal to 50 
percent of a homeowner's investment in seismic retrofit, not to exceed 
$6,000.
  2. It provides businesses an opportunity to depreciate the cost of 
seismic retrofit over five years.
  3. The bill defines a seismic retrofitting bond as a bond for which 
95 percent of the proceeds are used for seismic retrofitting 
expenditures or used to finance loans to borrowers for seismic 
retrofitting expenditures as ``qualified bonds.''
  4. It encourages private investments in seismic retrofitting of 
residential properties by allowing deduction of passive activity 
losses.
  5. The legislation provides mortgage insurance incentives for seismic 
retrofitting of residences.
  6. It authorizes a $1 billion Loss Reduction Trust Fund to provide 
matching grants for mitigation measures and recovery planning grants to 
reduce damage to buildings and utility and transportation systems 
critical to disaster response. Provided to local government entities, 
public and private hospitals, institutions of higher education, and 
special districts, the trust fund grants would require that the state 
and the local entity recipients benefitting from the investment fund a 
portion of the cost. To be eligible, the local entities must also have 
in place a long-term strategic earthquake loss reduction plan and 
enforce land use, building code, and other measures to reduce the 
vulnerability of facilities in the jurisdiction.
  7. And the bill authorizes establishment of the Advanced National 
Seismic Research and Monitoring System

[[Page S1756]]

by the United States Geological Survey.
  The incentives offered in this bill are available only if the 
recipient, sometimes with state aid, invests in the effort to prevent 
losses. These investments will spawn meaningful loss prevention actions 
that will benefit all of the stakeholders involved and will reduce the 
need for disaster aid.
  Public/private partnership work:
  City of Berkeley, CA, has demonstrated that even small incentives 
work. This city of 109,000 people spends about $1 million each year in 
hazard reduction activities. It rebates a portion of its real estate 
transfer tax, up to $1,500, to homeowners for loss reduction actions, 
waives permit fees for seismic residential retrofit projects, and 
offers low income loans up to $15,000 and some grants to low income 
senior and disabled homeowners for retrofit work.
  In the 10 ears since these incentives were put in place, 38 percent 
of the single-family homes have had some form of retrofit work done and 
30 percent of small apartment buildings have been improved.
  Berkeley has also passed seven special taxes that concentrate funding 
on pre-disaster mitigation.
  Federal incentives can empower similar results nationwide. Cities 
like Berkeley, where the earthquake threat is a critical community 
concern, will benefit from the additional inducements included in this 
bill.
  Preventing damage makes sense, and it benefits our nation in many 
ways besides reducing the need for disaster aide. Not all benefits are 
easily quantified because they accrue to a variety of stakeholders and 
many of the indirect and human effects are subtle, yet important.
  Earthquakes impact all segments of the communities they strike, 
individuals, businesses, and public services such as police, fire, 
hospitals, and schools. Damage often creates economic ripples 
throughout the community and beyond state borders. Homeowners, building 
owners, their tenants, neighboring businesses, local and state 
government, and the Federal Government will benefit.
  Let me give you three examples of loss reduction projects that have 
widespread benefits:
  1. Water officials in Memphis, TN recently made the wise decision to 
invest in a structural upgrade of the Davis Water Pumping station. 
Strengthening this critical station cost about $488,000.
  What the officials at the Memphis Light, Gas, and Water Division 
recognize is that there is a fifty-fifty chance that a moderate 
earthquake will strike the Memphis area within the next fifteen years. 
It would cost $17 million to replace the water pumping station after 
such an earthquake. Plus, every day the station is inoperable costs 
about $1.4 million in lost services.
  The loss of drinkable water affects the entire community and cripples 
business activity. Considering the time to repair or replace a damaged 
pump facility, it is estimated that the cost of lost services would be 
$112 million. Clearly, a $488,000 investment is a good one.
  The Loss Reduction Trust Fund established by this bill authorizes $1 
billion in matching grants to strengthen critical infrastructure like 
the Davis Water Pumping Station.
  2. Another good example of forward thinking is the Anheuser-Busch 
brewery in Los Angeles. After realizing its facilities were vulnerable 
to earthquake damage, the company began a $20 million program to 
retrofit critical buildings and equipment. The brewery is a critical 
company asset because it supplies the Southwest and Pacific regions. 
Although located only a few miles from the epicenter of the 1994 
Northridge earthquake, the brewery was able to return to operation 
after just minor cleanup, repairs, and restoration of off-site water 
supply.
  Anheuser-Busch estimated that damage and business interruption costs 
could have exceeded $300 million after the Northridge quake, had it not 
strengthened its facilities. There was more at stake than the viability 
of a major business. Damage affects employees, federal, state, and 
local government income, suppliers, vendors, and the surrounding 
community.
  By accelerating depreciation of seismic retrofit expenses, this bill 
will encourage other businesses to carry out similar projects.
  3. And there is another example from the Northridge earthquake. Three 
months before that quake, a homeowner in the Hollywood area of Los 
Angeles spent $3,200 to retrofit his 1911-vintage home. The house 
survived with only minor damage, while similar houses on the same block 
suffered severe damage. In fact, several of those neighboring homes 
were demolished by the earthquake.
  Many homes across the nation are built on poorly braced foundation 
walls or piers and posts and are vulnerable to damage during even mild 
earthquake activity. The cost to add the bracing needed generally is 
only a few thousand dollars, yet the cost of repairing a home after it 
falls is tens of thousands of dollars. As with a business, when a home 
topples, there is more at stake than injury to family members and the 
cost of repairs. Not to mention the fact that a falling home can spark 
a fire that can burn an entire community.
  This bill creates a tax credit for half of the cost of the seismic 
retrofit of a residence, makes mortgages for earthquake resistant homes 
more attractive than those for homes meeting lower standards, and makes 
it easier for local government to use general obligation bonds 
financing for loss prevention project loans.
  FEMA's HAZUS software was recently used to estimate how the 
individual actions provided by the bill could add up to significant 
savings of importance to our communities, economy, and governments.
  If a magnitude 7.0 earthquake occurred on the Newport-Inglewood fault 
under Los Angeles today, it could cause about $80 billion in damages. 
Thousands of businesses would be interrupted, 400,000 people would be 
displaced, and there would be several hundred deaths. If every existing 
building in that area were retrofitted to the standards in current 
codes, the losses would drop by $28 billion to $52 billion. Business 
interruption losses would drop from $15 billion to less than $6 
billion. The number of people displaced would shrink to 93,000, and the 
estimated number of deaths would drop by over 90 percent.
  Similarly, a magnitude 7.0 earthquake on the Hayward fault in the San 
Francisco Bay area would cause about $37 billion in damages, if it 
struck today. 140,000 people would be displaced. However, if every 
existing building were retrofitted to the standards in current codes, 
the losses would be reduced by a third. Business interruption losses 
would drop from $6.5 billion to about $2 billion. The number of people 
displaced would shrink to 40,000 and the estimated deaths would drop by 
more than 90 percent.
  Assuming that all buildings meet the latest seismic standards is 
ambitious, but the resulting estimates give convincing evidence that 
implementing loss reduction measures can pay handsome dividends.
  Moreover, the importance of loss reduction efforts extends beyond 
these quantitative estimates. Less damage means less psychological 
pain, more sustainable communities and businesses, protected stocks of 
low-income housing and architecturally and historically significant 
buildings and neighborhoods, and protected family savings. Every time a 
neighbor, employer, or local government invests in prevention, the 
entire community benefits.
  Earthquakes are a nationwide problem. They have struck the Northeast 
and Northwest, damaged Charleston, Saint Louis, and Memphis, struck our 
mountain states, Alaska, and Hawaii. They will strike these and other 
places again.
  Much of the knowledge we need to reduce losses from future 
earthquakes exists. While some forward thinking businesses, 
individuals, and local governments are already using the knowledge to 
invest in measures to reduce future losses, the Earthquake Loss 
Reduction Act creates modest federal incentives to foster a needed 
increase in the implementation of hazard mitigation measures.
  This bill also establishes a $1 billion grant program to match the 
investments from local government entities, hospitals, and institutions 
of higher education. It challenges states to add to this match, and 
makes investment in properties for the purpose of seismic retrofit an 
attractive investment in

[[Page S1757]]

our future. While the occurrence of large-scale earthquakes may be 
perceived as a low probability, our experience shows the high 
consequence of these events.
  Strong federal leadership, and modest incentive, can lead Americans 
to undertake loss reduction measures and can lead us to a safer 
tomorrow. I urge my colleagues to support the Earthquake Loss Reduction 
Act.
  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. 424

       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 ``Earthquake Loss Reduction 
     Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
       (1) After 23 years of research funded by the National 
     Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, a substantial body of 
     knowledge exists about earth sciences, geotechnical, and 
     structural engineering and human behavior relating 
     earthquakes.
       (2) The foremost challenge as we enter the 21st century is 
     putting this knowledge to work by reducing future losses to 
     improve the safety of Americans and the performance of State 
     and local government facilities and private buildings and 
     facilities.
       (3) Earthquakes and tsunamis cause great danger to human 
     life and property throughout the United States and continue 
     to threaten Americans significantly in over 40 States and 
     territories.
       (4) Too few States and local communities have sufficiently 
     identified and assessed their risk and implemented adequate 
     measures to reduce losses from such disasters and to ensure 
     that their critical public infrastructure and facilities will 
     continue to function after the disaster.
       (5) Too much of the Nation's stocks of housing and 
     commercial buildings remain inherently vulnerable to 
     earthquake shaking. Future losses in these facilities can be 
     lessened using currently feasible technology.
       (6) Too much of local government infrastructure remain at 
     risk and are likely to be non-functional in the aftermath of 
     foreseeable earthquake events at the time when the services 
     they provide are critically necessary.
       (7) Federal, State and local government expenditures for 
     disaster assistance and recovery have increased without 
     commensurate reduction in the likelihood of future losses 
     from such earthquakes.
       (8) Feasible techniques for reducing future earthquake 
     losses are readily available.
       (9) Without economic incentives, it is unlikely that States 
     and local communities and the public will be able to 
     implement available measures to reduce losses and ensure 
     continued functionality of their infrastructure.
       (b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this Act to establish a 
     national disaster mitigation program that --
       (1) reduces the loss of life and property, human suffering, 
     economic disruption, and disaster assistance costs resulting 
     from earthquakes;
       (2) offers financial incentives to encourage private sector 
     efforts to reduce earthquake losses;
       (3) provides matching finds to encourage and assist States 
     and local governments and the private sector in their efforts 
     to implement measures designed to ensure the continued 
     functionality of public infrastructure, commerce, and 
     habitation after earthquakes; and
       (4) creates Federal, State and local government 
     partnerships to reduce the vulnerability of public 
     infrastructure, commercial enterprises, and residential 
     buildings to earthquakes.

     SEC. 3. NONREFUNDABLE CREDIT FOR EXPENSES RELATED TO SEISMIC 
                   RETROFIT OF PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE.

       (a) General Rule.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 25A the following:

     ``SEC. 25B. EXPENSES RELATED TO SEISMIC RETROFIT OF PRINCIPAL 
                   RESIDENCE.

       ``(a) General Rule.--In the case of an individual, there 
     shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this 
     chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to 50 percent of 
     so much of the qualified seismic retrofit expenses of the 
     taxpayer for the taxable year as do not exceed $6,000.
       ``(b) Qualified Seismic Retrofit Expenses.--For purposes of 
     this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified seismic retrofit 
     expenses' means amounts paid or incurred by the taxpayer 
     during the taxable year in relation to any seismic retrofit 
     construction of the principal residence of the taxpayer.
       ``(2) Seismic retrofit construction.--The term `seismic 
     retrofit construction' means any addition or improvement--
       ``(A) which is certified by the State disaster agency or 
     other applicable agency--
       ``(i) as resulting in the mitigation of the risk of damage 
     to existing property from an earthquake, and
       ``(ii) as being in addition to any addition or improvement 
     required by any State or local law with respect to such 
     property, and
       ``(B) which is placed in service at least 5 years after the 
     date the building is first placed in service.

     Such term does not include the cost of acquiring such 
     property (or any interest therein).
       ``(3) Principal residence.--The term `principal residence' 
     has the same meaning as when used in section 121.
       ``(c) Denial of Double Benefit.--No deduction shall be 
     allowed under any other provision of this chapter with 
     respect to any amount of qualified seismic retrofit expenses 
     taken into account under subsection (a).
       ``(d) Basis Adjustment.--For purposes of this subtitle, if 
     a credit is allowed under this section with respect to any 
     residence, the basis of such residence shall be reduced by 
     the amount of the credit so allowed.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--
       (1) The table of sections for subpart A of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 25A the following new item:

``Sec. 25B. Expenses related to seismic retrofit of principal 
              residence.''.

       (2) Subsection (a) of section 1016 of such Code is amended 
     by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (26), by striking 
     the period at the end of paragraph (27) and inserting ``, 
     and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(28) in the case of a residence with respect to which a 
     credit was allowed under section 25B, to the extent provided 
     in section 25B(d).''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to expenses paid or incurred in taxable years 
     beginning after December 31, 2000.

     SEC. 4. RECOVERY PERIOD FOR DEPRECIATION OF CERTAIN SEISMIC 
                   RETROFIT EXPENSES.

       (a) Treatment as 5-Year Property.--Section 168(e)(3)(B) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 5-year 
     property) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of clause 
     (v), by striking the period and inserting ``, and'' at the 
     end of clause (vi), and by inserting after clause (vi) the 
     following new clause:
       ``(vii) any qualified seismic retrofit property.''.
       (b) Definition of Qualified Seismic Retrofit Property.--
     Section 168(i) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating 
     to definitions and special rules) is amended by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(15) Qualified Seismic Retrofit Property.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified seismic retrofit 
     property' means any addition or improvement to real property 
     for which depreciation is allowable under this section--
       ``(i) for which the expenditure is properly chargeable to 
     the capital account, and
       ``(ii) which is a seismic retrofit.
       ``(B) Seismic retrofit.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A)(i), the term `seismic retrofit' means any addition or 
     improvement--
       ``(i) which is certified by the State disaster agency or 
     other applicable agency--

       ``(I) as resulting in the mitigation of the risk of damage 
     to existing property from an earthquake, and
       ``(II) as being in addition to any addition or improvement 
     required by any State or local law with respect to such 
     property, and

       ``(ii) which is placed in service at least 5 years after 
     the date the building is first placed in service.

     Such term does not include the cost of acquiring such 
     property (or any interest therein).''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to qualified seismic retrofit property placed in 
     service after December 31, 2000.

     SEC. 5. QUALIFIED SEISMIC RETROFITTING BONDS.

       (a) In General.-- Section 144 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to qualified small issue bond; qualified 
     student loan bond; qualified redevelopment bond) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Qualified seismic retrofitting bond.--For purposes of 
     this part--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified seismic retrofitting 
     bond' means any bond issued as part of an issue 95 percent or 
     more of the net proceeds of which are to be used--
       ``(A) for seismic retrofitting expenditures, and
       ``(B) in a manner which meets the requirements of paragraph 
     (3).
       ``(2) Seismic retrofitting expenditure.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (1), the term `seismic retrofitting expenditure' 
     means any amount properly chargeable to capital account--
       ``(A) which is certified by the State disaster agency or 
     other applicable agency--
       ``(i) as resulting in the mitigation of the risk of damage 
     to existing property from an earthquake, and
       ``(ii) as being in addition to any addition or improvement 
     required by any State or local law with respect to such 
     property, and
       ``(B) which is placed in service at least 5 years after the 
     date the building is first placed in service.

     Such term does not include the cost of acquiring such 
     property (or any interest therein).

[[Page S1758]]

       ``(3) Use of proceeds requirements.--The use of the 
     proceeds of an issue meets the requirements of this paragraph 
     if within the 26-month period beginning with the date of 
     issue--
       ``(A) at least 95 percent of the net proceeds of such issue 
     are used for seismic retrofitting expenditures or are used to 
     finance 1 or more loans to ultimate borrowers for such 
     expenditures, or
       ``(B) to the extent not so used under subparagraph (A), 
     such proceeds in excess of $10,000 are used to redeem bonds 
     which are part of such issue.''.
       (b) Bonds Treated as Qualified Bonds.--Paragraph (1) of 
     section 141(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining 
     qualified bond) is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of 
     subparagraph (F), by redesignating subparagraph (G) as 
     subparagraph (H), and by inserting after subparagraph (F) the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(G) a qualified seismic retrofitting bond, or''.
       (c) Bonds Included for Purposes of Small Issuer Exemption 
     Status.--Subclause (I) of section 265(b)(3)(C)(ii) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to obligations not 
     taken into account in determining status as qualified small 
     issuer) is amended by inserting ``, or a qualified seismic 
     retrofitting bond, as defined in section 144(d)(1)'' after 
     ``section 145''.
       (d) Exception From Volume Cap.--Section 146(g) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exception for 
     certain bonds) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of 
     paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end of paragraph 
     (4) and inserting a comma, and by adding after paragraph (4) 
     the following new paragraphs:
       ``(5) any qualified mortgage bond if 95 percent or more of 
     the net proceeds of the bond are to be used to provide home 
     improvement loans in connection with seismic retrofitting 
     expenditures (as defined in section 144(d)(2) without regard 
     to the capital account requirement), and
       ``(6) any qualified seismic retrofitting bond.''.
       (e) Proceeds of Mortgage Revenue Bonds Used in Connection 
     With Seismic Retrofitting.--
       (1) In general.--Paragraph (4) of section 143(k) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to other definitions 
     and special rules for qualified mortgage bonds) is amended to 
     read as follows:
       ``(4) Qualified home improvement loan.--The term `qualified 
     home improvement loan' means--
       ``(A) the financing (in an amount which does not exceed 
     $15,000)--
       ``(i) of alterations, repairs, and improvements on or in 
     connection with an existing residence by the owner thereof, 
     but
       ``(ii) only for such items as substantially protect or 
     improve the basic livability or energy efficiency of the 
     property, and
       ``(B) the financing (in an amount which does not exceed 
     $20,000) of seismic retrofitting expenditures (as defined in 
     section 144(d)(2) without regard to the capital account 
     requirement) in connection with an existing residence by the 
     owner thereof.''.
       (2) Exception from income requirements.--Section 143(f) of 
     such Code (relating to income requirements) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(7) Exception for certain qualified home improvement 
     loans.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply with respect to any 
     qualified home improvement loan (as defined in subsection 
     (k)(4)(B).''.
       (f) Clerical Amendments.--
       (1) The heading of section 144 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 is amended by striking ``bond.'' and inserting ``bond 
     qualified seismic retrofitting bond.''.
       (2) The item relating to section 144 in the table of 
     sections for subpart A of part IV of subchapter B of chapter 
     1 of such Code is amended by striking ``bond.'' and inserting 
     ``bond; qualified seismic retrofitting bond.''
       (g) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 6. TREATMENT OF PASSIVE LOSSES OF CERTAIN PARTNERSHIPS 
                   ENGAGED IN SEISMIC RETROFITTING.

       (a) In General.--Section 469 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to passive activity losses and credits 
     limited) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(n) Exemption for Seismic Retrofitting Trade or 
     Business.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of any natural person, 
     subsection (a) shall not apply to that portion of the passive 
     activity loss or the deduction equivalent (within the meaning 
     of subsection (j)(5)) of the passive activity credit for any 
     taxable year which is attributable to any seismic 
     retrofitting activity which such person engages in during the 
     taxable year, whether or not the taxpayer materially 
     participates in such activity.
       ``(2) Seismic retrofitting activity.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term `seismic retrofitting activity' means 
     any activity which involves the trade or business of seismic 
     retrofit construction (as defined in section 25B(b)(2)) for 
     residential property.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2000.

     SEC. 7. MORTGAGE INSURANCE INCENTIVE.

       Section 203(b)(2) of the National Housing Act (12 U.S.C. 12 
     U.S.C. 1709(b)(2)), is amended, in the second undesignated 
     paragraph, by inserting ``or due to seismic retrofitting of 
     the residence (within the meaning of the term `seismic 
     retrofit construction' under section 25B(b)(2) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986)'' before the period at the 
     end.

     SEC. 8. EARTHQUAKE DISASTER MITIGATION AND RECOVERY PLANNING 
                   GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Definitions.--
       (1) In general.--Section 4 of the Earthquake Hazards 
     Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7703) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(8) Agency.--The term `Agency' means the Federal 
     Emergency Management Agency.
       ``(9) Critical facility.--The term `critical facility' 
     means--
       ``(A) a public structure (including a police station, fire 
     station, city or town hall, school, or other public building) 
     or a public or nonprofit private hospital that is--
       ``(i) owned by an entity; and
       ``(ii) critical to the continuity of the entity or to the 
     conduct of the disaster response activities of the entity; or
       ``(B) a facility that--
       ``(i) provides medical services to a specific occupational 
     or industry segment of the general public; and
       ``(ii) is operated by an organization described in 
     subsection (c) or (d) of section 501 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under subsection (a) of 
     such section.
       ``(10) Critical public infrastructure.--The term `critical 
     public infrastructure' means a utility or transportation 
     system (including a bridge, energy system, water or sewer 
     system, or communication system) that is--
       ``(A) owned by an entity; and
       ``(B) critical to the conduct of the disaster response 
     activities of the entity.
       ``(11) Earthquake disaster.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `earthquake disaster' means a 
     disaster that results from a movement of the earth.
       ``(B) Inclusions.--The term `earthquake disaster' includes 
     a disaster that results from a tsunami or an earthquake-
     caused landslide or liquefaction (as determined by the 
     Director of the Agency).
       ``(12) Grant program.--The term `grant program' means the 
     earthquake disaster mitigation and recovery planning grant 
     program established under section 6.
       ``(13) Indian tribe.--The term `Indian tribe' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       ``(14) Institution of higher education.--The term 
     `institution of higher education' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1001).
       ``(15) Local government.--The term `local government' 
     means--
       ``(A) a city, town, township, county, parish, village, or 
     other general-purpose political subdivision of a State;
       ``(B) an Indian tribe; and
       ``(C) a geologic hazard abatement or similar special 
     purpose district formed to carry out or fund projects to 
     reduce the vulnerability of infrastructure and buildings to 
     earthquake disasters.
       ``(16) Loss reduction trust fund.--The term `Loss Reduction 
     Trust Fund' means the Loss Reduction Trust Fund established 
     by section 7.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 5(b)(1) of the 
     Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
     7704(b)(1)) is amended by striking ``(hereafter in this Act 
     referred to as the `Agency')''.
       (b) Grant Program.--The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
     1977 is amended by inserting after section 5 (42 U.S.C. 7704) 
     the following:

     ``SEC. 6. EARTHQUAKE DISASTER MITIGATION AND RECOVERY 
                   PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the Agency may 
     establish a grant program to provide financial assistance to 
     eligible recipients described in subsection (b) to pay the 
     Federal share of the cost of carrying out earthquake disaster 
     mitigation and recovery planning measures with respect to the 
     critical facilities and critical public infrastructure under 
     the jurisdiction of the recipients.
       ``(b) Eligible Recipients.--
       ``(1) In general.--To be eligible for a grant under the 
     grant program, an entity shall be a local government, public 
     or nonprofit private hospital, or public institution of 
     higher education that--
       ``(A) has jurisdiction over, or is located in, an area that 
     is subject to earthquake disasters;
       ``(B) submits to the Director of the Agency for approval an 
     application for the grant in such form as the Director shall 
     require;
       ``(C) has completed an earthquake disaster risk analysis;
       ``(D) has adopted a long-term strategic earthquake disaster 
     loss reduction plan that identifies high priority earthquake 
     disaster loss reduction projects; and
       ``(E) meets criteria established by the Director under 
     paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Criteria.--
       ``(A) Establishment.--The Director of the Agency shall 
     establish, by regulation, criteria that local governments, 
     public and nonprofit private hospitals, and public 
     institutions of higher education shall meet to qualify for 
     grants under the grant program.
       ``(B) Requirement applicable to local governments.--The 
     criteria under subparagraph (A) applicable to local 
     governments shall include the requirement that a local

[[Page S1759]]

     government adopt and enforce comprehensive ordinances, 
     building codes, land use measures, and other measures for 
     earthquake disaster loss reduction that--
       ``(i) take into consideration the identified earthquake 
     hazards applicable to the area over which the local 
     government has jurisdiction; and
       ``(ii) reflect current, cost-effective techniques designed 
     to reduce losses from earthquake disasters and ensure the 
     continued functionality of critical facilities and critical 
     public infrastructure.
       ``(C) Consultation.--The criteria under subparagraph (A) 
     shall be adopted after consultation with--
       ``(i) Federal, State, and local government officials and 
     agencies; and
       ``(ii) other persons knowledgeable in the fields of natural 
     disasters and hazard mitigation.
       ``(c) Cost Sharing.--
       ``(1) Federal share.--
       ``(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the Federal 
     share of the cost of measures carried out using a grant under 
     the grant program shall be 75 percent.
       ``(B) Insufficiency of federal funds.--In paying the 
     Federal share under subparagraph (A) in a case in which there 
     are insufficient funds in the Loss Reduction Trust Fund to 
     fund all applications that are eligible for approval, the 
     Director of the Agency may consider--
       ``(i) the desirability of geographical dispersal of 
     available funds;
       ``(ii) the extent to which any applicant faces a greater 
     risk of earthquake disasters, in number or severity, than 
     other applicants;
       ``(iii) the extent to which each applicant is expending 
     resources on addressing urgent problems concerning critical 
     facilities or critical public infrastructure; and
       ``(iv) the extent to which the measures proposed to be 
     funded using the grant are expected to result in cost savings 
     to the Federal Government under the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 
     et seq.).
       ``(2) Non-federal share.--
       ``(A) Grants to local governments (other than indian 
     tribes).--In the case of a grant to a local government (other 
     than an Indian tribe) under the grant program, the non-
     Federal share of the cost of measures carried out using the 
     grant shall be provided as follows:
       ``(i) \1/2\ by the State.
       ``(ii) \1/2\ by the local government.
       ``(B) Grants to indian tribes.--In the case of a grant to 
     an Indian tribe under the grant program, the non-Federal 
     share of the cost of measures carried out using the grant 
     shall be provided as follows:
       ``(i) \1/2\ by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
       ``(ii) \1/2\ by the Indian tribe.
       ``(C) Grants to public hospitals.--In the case of a grant 
     to a public hospital under the grant program, the non-Federal 
     share of the cost of measures carried out using the grant 
     shall be provided as follows:
       ``(i) \1/2\ by the State, from funds other than general 
     State appropriations to the hospital.
       ``(ii) \1/2\ by the public hospital, from general State 
     appropriations to the hospital or from funds donated to the 
     hospital.
       ``(D) Grants to nonprofit private hospitals.--In the case 
     of a grant to a nonprofit private hospital under the grant 
     program, the non-Federal share of the cost of measures 
     carried out using the grant shall be provided by the 
     nonprofit private hospital.
       ``(E) Grants to public institutions of higher education.--
     In the case of a grant to a public institution of higher 
     education under the grant program, the non-Federal share of 
     the cost of measures carried out using the grant shall be 
     provided as follows:
       ``(i) \1/2\ by the State, from funds other than general 
     State appropriations to the institution of higher education.
       ``(ii) \1/2\ by the public institution of higher education, 
     from general State appropriations to the institution of 
     higher education or from funds donated to the institution of 
     higher education.
       ``(d) Use of Grant Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--A grant under the grant program may be 
     used--
       ``(A) to retrofit critical facilities and critical public 
     infrastructure in accordance with paragraph (2);
       ``(B) to implement earthquake disaster mitigation measures 
     in accordance with paragraph (3); or
       ``(C) to develop earthquake disaster recovery plans in 
     accordance with paragraph (4).
       ``(2) Retrofit of critical facilities and critical public 
     infrastructure.--
       ``(A) In general.--A grant under the grant program may be 
     used to retrofit a critical facility or critical public 
     infrastructure with parts or equipment that meets current 
     standards for withstanding earthquake disasters (as 
     determined by the Director of the Agency).
       ``(B) Selection of critical facilities and critical public 
     infrastructure.--A critical facility or critical public 
     infrastructure shall be selected for a grant under 
     subparagraph (A) if the critical facility or critical public 
     infrastructure is identified in a long-term strategic 
     earthquake disaster loss reduction plan adopted under 
     subsection (b)(1)(D) as having high priority for retrofit 
     because of the effect that damage to the critical facility or 
     critical public infrastructure from an earthquake disaster 
     would have on the quality of human life in the region and on 
     recovery from the earthquake disaster.
       ``(3) Implementation of earthquake disaster mitigation 
     measures.--A grant under the grant program may be used to 
     implement an earthquake disaster mitigation measure designed 
     to ensure the continued functionality of a critical facility 
     or critical public infrastructure.
       ``(4) Development of earthquake disaster recovery plans.--
       ``(A) In general.--A grant under the grant program may be 
     used to develop an earthquake disaster recovery plan that 
     includes--
       ``(i) a plan for reestablishing government operations and 
     community services after an earthquake disaster; and
       ``(ii) a plan for long-term recovery after an earthquake 
     disaster.
       ``(B) Schedule for payment of grant funds.--Of a grant for 
     measures described in subparagraph (A)--
       ``(i) 50 percent shall be paid upon approval by the 
     Director of the Agency of the application for the grant; and
       ``(ii) 50 percent shall be paid upon adoption of the 
     earthquake disaster recovery plan by the local government, 
     public hospital, or public institution of higher education.

     ``SEC. 7. LOSS REDUCTION TRUST FUND.

       ``(a) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury 
     of the United States a fund to be known as the `Loss 
     Reduction Trust Fund', consisting of--
       ``(1) such amounts as are appropriated to the Loss 
     Reduction Trust Fund under subsection (b);
       ``(2) such amounts as are appropriated to the Loss 
     Reduction Trust Fund under section 13(e); and
       ``(3) any interest earned on investment of amounts in the 
     Loss Reduction Trust Fund under subsection (d).
       ``(b) Transfers to Loss Reduction Trust Fund.--There are 
     appropriated to the Loss Reduction Trust Fund amounts 
     equivalent to--
       ``(1) such amounts as the Director of the Agency determines 
     are remaining after the close-out of any active disaster 
     declaration account under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
     Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.);
       ``(2) such amounts as--
       ``(A) were allocated for hazard mitigation assistance with 
     respect to a major disaster under section 404 of that Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5170c); and
       ``(B) the Director of the Agency determines are remaining 
     after expiration of the time limits established under 
     subsection (c) of that section; and
       ``(3) amounts received as gifts under subsection (f).
       ``(c) Expenditures From Loss Reduction Trust Fund.--Upon 
     request by the Director of the Agency, the Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall transfer from the Loss Reduction Trust Fund to 
     the Director of the Agency such amounts as the Director of 
     the Agency determines are necessary to carry out section 6.
       ``(d) Investment of Amounts.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     invest such portion of the Loss Reduction Trust Fund as is 
     not, in the judgment of the Secretary of the Treasury, 
     required to meet current withdrawals. Investments may be made 
     only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States.
       ``(2) Acquisition of obligations.--For the purpose of 
     investments under paragraph (1), obligations may be 
     acquired--
       ``(A) on original issue at the issue price; or
       ``(B) by purchase of outstanding obligations at the market 
     price.
       ``(3) Sale of obligations.--Any obligation acquired by the 
     Loss Reduction Trust Fund may be sold by the Secretary of the 
     Treasury at the market price.
       ``(4) Credits to fund.--The interest on, and the proceeds 
     from the sale or redemption of, any obligations held in the 
     Loss Reduction Trust Fund shall be credited to and form a 
     part of the Loss Reduction Trust Fund.
       ``(e) Transfers of Amounts.--
       ``(1) In general.--The amounts required to be transferred 
     to the Loss Reduction Trust Fund under this section shall be 
     transferred at least monthly from the general fund of the 
     Treasury to the Loss Reduction Trust Fund on the basis of 
     estimates made by the Secretary of the Treasury.
       ``(2) Adjustments.--Proper adjustment shall be made in 
     amounts subsequently transferred to the extent prior 
     estimates were in excess of or less than the amounts required 
     to be transferred.
       ``(f) Gifts.--The Secretary of the Treasury may accept 
     gifts of cash for transfer to the Loss Reduction Trust 
     Fund.''.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 12 of the 
     Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706) is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
       ``(e) Loss Reduction Trust Fund.--There is authorized to be 
     appropriated to the Loss Reduction Trust Fund 
     $1,000,000,000.''.
       (d) Postdisaster Assistance.--
       (1) Definitions.--Section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(10) Critical facility.--The term `critical facility' 
     means--
       ``(A) a public structure (including a police station, fire 
     station, city or town hall, school, or other public building) 
     or a public or nonprofit private hospital that is--
       ``(i) owned by an entity; and
       ``(ii) critical to the continuity of the entity or to the 
     conduct of the disaster response activities of the entity; or

[[Page S1760]]

       ``(B) a facility that--
       ``(i) provides medical services to a specific occupational 
     or industry segment of the general public; and
       ``(ii) is operated by an organization described in 
     subsection (c) or (d) of section 501 of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 and exempt from taxation under subsection (a) of 
     such section.
       ``(11) Critical public infrastructure.--The term `critical 
     public infrastructure' means a utility or transportation 
     system (including a bridge, energy system, water or sewer 
     system, or communication system) that is--
       ``(A) owned by an entity; and
       ``(B) critical to the conduct of the disaster response 
     activities of the entity.''.
       (e) Conforming Amendments.--Section 12(a) of the Earthquake 
     Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7706(a)) is amended 
     by inserting ``(as in effect on September 30, 1997)'' after 
     ``6 of this Act'' each place it appears.

     SEC. 9. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING 
                   SYSTEM.

       (a) In General.--The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 
     1977 (42 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 12 as section 13; and
       (2) by inserting after section 11 the following:

     ``SEC. 12. ADVANCED NATIONAL SEISMIC RESEARCH AND MONITORING 
                   SYSTEM.

       ``(a) Establishment.--The Director of the United States 
     Geological Survey shall establish and operate an advanced 
     national seismic research and monitoring system (referred to 
     in this section as the `system').
       ``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the system shall be to 
     organize, modernize, standardize, and stabilize the national, 
     regional, and urban seismic monitoring systems in the United 
     States, including sensors, recorders, and data analysis 
     centers, and meld the monitoring systems into a coordinated 
     system that will measure and record the full range of 
     frequencies and amplitudes exhibited by seismic waves, in 
     order to enhance earthquake research and warning 
     capabilities.
       ``(c) Management Plan.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of the Earthquake Loss Reduction Act of 2001, the 
     Director of the United States Geological Survey shall submit 
     to Congress a 5-year management plan for establishing and 
     operating the system.
       ``(2) Required elements.--The plan shall include--
       ``(A) annual cost estimates for--
       ``(i) milestones, standards, and performance goals for 
     modernization of the seismic monitoring systems referred to 
     in subsection (b); and
       ``(ii) milestones, standards, and performance goals for 
     operation of the system; and
       ``(B) plans for securing the participation of all existing 
     networks in the system and for establishing new, or enhancing 
     existing, partnerships to leverage resources.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--In addition to amounts made available 
     under section 13(b), there are authorized to be appropriated 
     to establish the system--
       ``(A) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2002;
       ``(B) $33,700,000 for fiscal year 2003;
       ``(C) $35,100,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       ``(D) $35,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
       ``(E) $33,500,000 for fiscal year 2006.
       ``(2) Operation.--In addition to amounts made available 
     under section 13(b), there are authorized to be appropriated 
     to operate the system--
       ``(A) $4,500,000 for fiscal year 2002; and
       ``(B) $10,300,000 for fiscal year 2003.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 2 of Public Law 105-47 
     (42 U.S.C. 7704 note) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(7), by striking ``section 12(b) of 
     the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 (42 U.S.C. 
     7706(b))'' and inserting ``section 13(b) of the Earthquake 
     Hazards Reduction Act of 1977''; and
       (2) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``section 12(c) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 7706(c))'' and inserting ``section 13(c) 
     of that Act''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLARD (for himself and Mr. Campbell):
  S. 425. A bill to establish the Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge 
in the State of Colorado, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Armed Services.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation, 
along with my good friend and Colorado colleague, Senator Ben 
Nighthorse Campbell, to permanently designate Rocky Flats as a National 
Wildlife Refuge following the cleanup and closure of the site.
  This legislation is the beginning of a new chapter in the history of 
Rocky Flats. The Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge Act is the 
product of more than a year's worth of work by citizens, community 
leaders, and local elected officials. Its passage will ensure our 
children and grandchildren will continue to enjoy the wildlife and open 
space that currently exists at Rocky Flats.
  To that end, I have worked in a bi-partisan manner with my Colorado 
colleague from the other body, Congressman Mark Udall, to produce the 
Rocky Flats National Wildlife Refuge Act of 2001. This bill was 
originally introduced in November of 2000, and with a few refinements, 
is being reintroduced today in both the Senate and House. Also, this 
bill could not be possible without the hard work and dedication of the 
local governments and the Rocky Flats stakeholders.
  My vested interest in Rocky Flats began during the 1980's when I was 
the Chairman of the State Senate Committee on Health, Environment, 
Welfare and Institutions. Although I supported the national security 
mission of the Rocky Flats site prior to closure, I believe that the 
Department of Energy must also ensure the safety and health of all 
Coloradans and the environment. When the Rocky Flats site was shut down 
in 1990, cleaning up and closing of the site became one of my top 
legislative priorities and will remain so until this project is 
complete.
  In 1999, I became the Strategic Subcommittee Chairman of the Senate 
Armed Services Committee, which has direct oversight of former DoE 
weapons facilities including Rocky Flats. This is the first site in the 
DoE complex to receive funding for cleanup and closure, and will 
therefore be a role model for other sites in the complex. As Chairman 
of the Subcommittee, I will continue to work closely with my colleagues 
to educate them on the importance of cleaning up and closing down Rocky 
Flats so it can be utilized as a National Wildlife Refuge. This 
education extends beyond the cleanup and closure of Rocky Flats to the 
importance of cleaning up and closing of all the former DoE weapons 
sites and how all closure sites in the DoE complex are closely tied 
together. That is why it is important for everyone in Congress with a 
closure site to work together in a non-partisan manner for the good of 
the country. We also need to work close with our new Secretary of 
Energy, Spencer Abraham, to ensure that cleanup and closure remain a 
priority for DoE.
  As a brief summary of the bill, I would like to bring to your 
attention a few of the following high points of the bill:
  To begin, Rocky Flats will remain in permanent federal ownership 
through a transfer from the Department of Energy to the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service after the cleanup and closure of the site is complete.
  The historic Lindsay Ranch will be preserved for future generations.
  There will be no annexation of land to any local government, nor any 
construction of through roads. The only roads that may be constructed 
on the site would be by the Fish and Wildlife Service for the 
management of the refuge.
  The Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of the Interior are 
authorized to grant a transportation right-of-way on the eastern 
boundary of the site for transportation improvements along Indiana 
Street. Please note, however, that we are aware of the continued 
evaluation of this issue and want this section of the bill to be 
consistent with the needs of the local governments.
  The Department of Energy and the Fish and Wildlife Service are to 
enter into a Memorandum of Understanding addressing administrative 
responsibilities prior to the transfer of the site not later than 1 
year after the enactment of this Act.
  The Department of Energy will not transfer any property to the Fish 
and Wildlife Service that must be retained for future onsite monitoring 
or that must be retained for protection of human health and safety. 
This legislation also clarifies that in the event of future cleanup 
activities, this action will take priority over wildlife management.
  One of the most important directives in this Act and it states that 
``nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect the degree of 
cleanup at the Rocky Flats site required under the Rocky Flats Cleanup 
Agreement or any Federal or State law.'' I believe it is important to 
reiterate that this bill should not be used as a mechanism to drive the 
level of cleanup. As with any cleanup, the future land use is always 
considered in setting cleanup levels, but other important factors will 
play into any decision. For instance, the protection of surface water 
coming off the site, the desire to minimize long-

[[Page S1761]]

term operation and monitoring costs, and the State of Colorado's rules 
for decommissioning nuclear sites which say licensees should reduce 
potential radiation dose levels as low as reasonably achievable.
  Once the site is transferred to the Fish and Wildlife Service, the 
refuge will be managed in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge 
System Act to preserve wildlife, enhance wildlife habitat, conserve 
threatened and endangered species, provide education opportunities and 
scientific research, as well as wildlife compatible recreation.
  The Fish and Wildlife Service are to convene a public process to 
include input on the management of the site.
  I firmly believe that access rights and property rights must be 
preserved. Therefore, this legislation recognizes and preserves all 
mineral rights, water rights and utility rights-of-way. This Act does, 
however, provide the Secretary of Energy and the Secretary of Interior 
the authority to impose reasonable conditions on the access to private 
property rights for cleanup and refuge management purposes.
  With regard to mineral rights, the Secretary of Energy is required to 
seek to purchase mineral rights from willing sellers.
  As a tribute to the Cold War and the dedicated Rocky Flats workers 
both prior to and after the site closure, the bill authorizes the 
establishment of a Rocky Flats museum to commemorate the site requiring 
that the creation of the museum shall be studied, and a report shall be 
submitted to Congress within three years following the enactment of 
this act.
  Finally, this bill directs the Department of Energy and the Fish and 
Wildlife Service to inform Congress on the costs associated with the 
implementation of this Act.
  Lastly, I want to thank Representative Mark Udall for the bi-partisan 
manner in which he and his staff worked with me and my office. Rocky 
Flats, like all other cleanup sites, is bigger than partisan politics 
and this effort proves it. I would also like to specifically thank the 
Department of Energy for taking the expedited cleanup plan and making 
it work within their budgetary guidelines; Kaiser-Hill for making the 
impossible, possible; and, I would like to say a great big thanks to 
all of the workers at Rocky Flats whose skill and dedication have made 
the reality of cleanup possible. Without the workers, even the best 
laid plans would be for naught.
  Once cleanup and closure is accomplished in 2006, I look forward to 
returning to Rocky Flats for the dedication of the new Rocky Flats 
National Wildlife Refuge.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Corzine, Mr. 
        Dayton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. 
        Rockefeller, and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 426. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
an income tax credit to holders of bonds financing new communications 
technologies, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Dayton, 
        Mr. Dodd, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. 
        Schumer):
  S. 427. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand 
the work opportunity tax credit for small business jobs creation; to 
the Committee on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. 
        Corzine, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. 
        Mikulski, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 428. A bill to provide grants and other incentives to promote new 
communications technologies, and for other purposes; to the Committee 
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. 
        Boxer, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
        Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 429. A bill to expand the Manufacturing Extension Program to bring 
the new economy to small and medium-sized businesses; to the Committee 
on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Corzine, Mr. 
        Dayton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. 
        Rockefeller, and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 430. A bill to provide incentives to promote broadband 
telecommunications services in rural America, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Corzine, 
        Mr. Dayton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, 
        Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 431. A bill to establish regional skills alliances, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON (for herself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Baucus, Mr. 
        Bingaman, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. 
        Kennedy, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mr. 
        Schumer):
  S. 432. A bill to provide for business incubator activities, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about bringing 
development and good jobs to upstate New York and other regions of our 
country that have not fully participated in our nation's economic 
growth.
  As I travel across the state and listen to the struggles of small 
business owners and workers, I'm often reminded of my father, who ran a 
small business and worked hard every day to provide for our family. I 
think about people like him who live in Plattsburgh and Buffalo, 
Rochester, Syracuse, Binghamton, Oneonta and every town and village in 
between. Most importantly, I think that--with the right ideas and a lot 
of hard work--we can create opportunities that will revitalize New 
York's upstate economy, as well as in places like these all across our 
country.
  Now as we all know, a historic shift has taken place in our economy 
and, to succeed in the twenty first century new economy, businesses 
have to be innovative, creative and flexible. Workers have to have 
better education and training; and community leaders have to bring all 
sectors of our communities together to make their hometowns more 
hospitable to high tech industries.
  Many parts of upstate New York have not been able to fully enjoy the 
fruits of the new knowledge based economy. Too many of our finest young 
people leave the state for better jobs elsewhere. Two summers ago, I 
talked to an upstate New York professor who told me what he thought was 
the biggest barrier to economic progress in the region: poor internet 
access. He pointed out that just as canals and railroad lines had made 
upstate, western and central New York the hub of the industrial economy 
in the 19th and 20th centuries, the region's shortage of high speed 
internet lines would hold us back in the 21st Century.
  Studies have shown, for example, that New York lags behind many 
states when it comes to the internet connections that are essential to 
commerce and communications in this new economy. But with leadership, 
and through partnerships, we can meet these challenges. All of us who 
care about the towns and villages in upstate New York and across our 
country have an obligation to help. That is why I am very proud today 
to introduce a package of legislation that is designed to bring new 
jobs to New York and to America.
  This legislation is the result of a lot of conversations, and 
listening, and hard work by many people. These seven bills will help 
bring all of New York online and into the new economy by promoting 
entrepreneurship and innovation, and by knocking down some of the 
stubborn barriers to economic progress.

[[Page S1762]]

  Just in the past three weeks, I have been in Rochester, and Rome and 
Watertown--Buffalo, and Niagara Falls meeting with business and labor 
leaders, academic, religious and civic leaders as well as citizens from 
all walks of life. I've also been meeting and talking with many of my 
Republican and Democratic colleagues here in the Congress--talking 
about the budget, and talking about the economies of New York and the 
rest of our nation.
  I have found that this legislation I propose today reflects the views 
and values, not only of many New Yorkers, but also a number of my 
colleagues here in the Senate. We agree that we have to clear away some 
of the major obstacles to economic growth and that we must invest in 
the skills of our country's greatest resources--our people.
  After all, upstate New York is the region where America's innovators, 
businesses and workers spun Thomas Edison's first light bulb, made 
cameras widely available to all Americans, created the nation's first 
business incubator and the pacemaker. Now, with a proud place in the 
economic history of our country, upstate New York deserves its place in 
the economic future as well. My legislation is designed to help bring 
all of New York to the forefront of the 21st century economy.
  Specifically, I propose the creation of new technology bonds. Using 
federal tax credits, states and local governments will be able to issue 
such bonds to help local governments invest in the high-speed data 
lines they need to attract cutting edge businesses.
  I propose creating new incentives to link industrial parks and small 
business incubators to the Internet--and to bring access to high-speed 
internet connections called broadband. Too many families and businesses 
still have to dial long distance to get on the Internet. That's why my 
plan also includes a $100 million initiative to help businesses bring 
broadband to rural and underserved communities.
  I also support research into the next generation of broadband 
technologies that could make access to the Internet even more cost-
effective. We have to help small businesses make the most of the new 
technologies to maximize profits and productivity. Too many firms still 
do not know where to begin when it comes to bringing their businesses 
online. Large businesses, we know, can spend millions on high-priced 
consultants to find out which computer and software systems to buy so 
they can best use the new technologies. But small, and even medium size 
businesses, just can't afford to do that.
  So, as part of my package of incentives, I am introducing what I call 
a Technology Extension Program to help small and medium business 
owners. For years, the federal government has provided farmers advice 
and expertise through the Cooperative Extension system. More recently, 
the Department of Commerce has successfully helped small manufacturers 
with new technologies through the Manufacturing Extension Program. I 
think we can build on the successes of these programs and help small 
and medium business owners in the same way, creating partnerships with 
universities and community colleges to transform their innovations into 
jobs for more and more people.
  New York is also a state blessed with some of the finest colleges and 
research institutions in the world. Yet, we haven't been able to 
transform a lot of those discoveries into commercial ventures near 
where they have been made. That's why my plan increases support for 
business incubators that can cut the time it takes for a breakthrough 
on the laboratory bench to make it to the factory and sales floor.
  Of course one of the most important parts of this legislation focuses 
on investing in the skills of our people. We can create all the high 
tech jobs we need from, you know, Plattsburg to Reno--but if they don't 
have people to fill them it's not going to mean anything, as I know 
that the President understands. That's why I'll fight to increase 
America's investment in the Regional Skills Alliances that bring 
businesses, universities, and community colleges together to make sure 
workers have the training they need in the modern workplace.
  I know that we have to support and encourage small businesses to 
bring jobs to places like upstate New York. My legislation will create 
a new Small Business Jobs Tax Credit to allow small firms in 
underserved communities across the country eligible because of 
population loss and low job growth--to claim a $3,000 tax credit for 
every employee they hire.
  Mr. President, during my campaign I promised that my first 
legislation would focus on promoting economic growth in upstate New 
York. That is why I am particularly pleased to be here in fulfillment 
of that pledge.
  But I see my plan as a part of a larger partnership to spur job 
creation across our country, where good people and their communities 
are in need of help. According to the latest Labor Department 
statistics New York, for example, as a whole enjoyed a 2.3 percent job 
growth rate last year. But upstate New York's job growth rate was about 
half of that at 1.2% and below the national average of 2.1 percent. Now 
behind those numbers are the lives and livelihoods of millions of 
people, and it is for those people that this legislation is being 
introduced. No parent should have to see a child leave his or her 
hometown simply because a good job can't be found.
  My co-sponsors and I know that the fight for new jobs for New York 
and America is a long and difficult one. We do not expect everything in 
this plan to pass in one year alone, or even in the exact form in which 
it is introduced. And standing alone, no single plan or Senator will be 
able to get the job done. But my colleagues and I understand we need a 
long-term partnership among people in government at all levels and with 
the private sector, business, labor, schools universities and others.
  That is why I also support S. 41 introduced by Senators Hatch and 
Baucus, and supported by many Democrats and Republicans to make the 
research and development tax credit permanent and to promote 
entrepreneurship and innovation. It's why I think we have to continue 
to tackle other stubborn barriers to economic growth like high 
utilities costs, high taxes and inadequate transportation and poor 
infrastructure. And of course, I can't talk about upstate New York 
without mentioning the spectacular geography and cultural heritage that 
is not only a source of pride, but also as a valuable economic 
resource.
  Mr. President, I would like to thank my colleagues, representing both 
parties, who have come together to join and sponsor one or more of my 
bills today. I look forward to talking to more members of this chamber 
and the other body in the days and weeks ahead. I believe if we take 
good ideas and through hard work make them real, we can revitalize New 
York's upstate economy and also give hope to the hardworking, deserving 
families of communities across our country. No one should have to leave 
their hometown, their families, and their roots to find a good job in 
America.
  I ask unanimous consent that text of the bills, the summary of the 
bills, and articles relevant to the bills be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 426

       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 ``Technology Bond Initiative 
     of 2001''.

     SEC. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Access to high-speed Internet is as important to 21st 
     Century businesses as access to the railroads and interstate 
     highways was to businesses of the last century.
       (2) Up to one-third of the United States population lacks 
     access to high-speed Internet.
       (3) Companies without access to high-speed Internet are 
     unable to meet their market potential, just as a community 
     cannot prosper if it doesn't have high quality roads and 
     bridges.
       (4) Technology bonds would provide incentives to State and 
     local governments to partner with the private sector to 
     expand broadband deployment in their communities, especially 
     underserved urban and rural areas.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT TO HOLDERS OF QUALIFIED TECHNOLOGY BONDS.

       (a) In General.--Part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to credits 
     against tax) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subpart:

[[Page S1763]]

 ``Subpart H--Nonrefundable Credit for Holders of Qualified Technology 
                                 Bonds

``Sec. 54. Credit to holders of qualified technology bonds.

     ``SEC. 54. CREDIT TO HOLDERS OF QUALIFIED TECHNOLOGY BONDS

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of a taxpayer who 
     holds a qualified technology bond on a credit allowance date 
     of such bond which occurs during the taxable year, there 
     shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by this 
     chapter for such taxable year the amount determined under 
     subsection (b).
       ``(b) Amount of Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--The amount of the credit determined 
     under this subsection with respect to any qualified 
     technology bond is the amount equal to the product of--
       ``(A) the credit rate determined by the Secretary under 
     paragraph (2) for the month in which such bond was issued, 
     multiplied by
       ``(B) the face amount of the bond held by the taxpayer on 
     the credit allowance date.
       ``(2) Determination.--During each calendar month, the 
     Secretary shall determine a credit rate which shall apply to 
     bonds issued during the following calendar month. The credit 
     rate for any month is the percentage which the Secretary 
     estimates will permit the issuance of qualified technology 
     bonds without discount and without interest cost to the 
     issuer.
       ``(c) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax.--The credit 
     allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not 
     exceed the excess of--
       ``(1) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in 
     section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
       ``(2) the sum of the credits allowable under this part 
     (other than this subpart and subpart C).
       ``(d) Qualified Technology Bond.--For purposes of this 
     part--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `qualified technology bond' 
     means any bond issued as part of an issue if--
       ``(A) 95 percent or more of the proceeds of such issue are 
     to be used for any or a series of qualified projects,
       ``(B) the bond is issued by a State or local government 
     within the jurisdiction of which such project is located.
       ``(C) the issuer designates such bond for purposes of this 
     section.
       ``(D) certifies that it has obtained the written approval 
     of the Secretary of Commerce for such project, and
       ``(E) the term of each bond which is part of such issue 
     does not exceed 15 years.
       ``(2) Qualified project.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified project' means a 
     project--
       ``(i) to expand broadband telecommunications services in an 
     area within the jurisdiction of a State or local government,
       ``(ii) which is nominated by such State or local government 
     for designation as a qualified project, and
       ``(iii) which the Secretary of Commerce, after consultation 
     with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     designates as a qualified project or a series of qualified 
     projects.
       ``(B) Designation preferences.--With respect to 
     designations under this section, preferences shall be given 
     to--
       ``(i) nominations of projects involving underserved urban 
     or rural areas lacking access to high-speed Internet 
     connections, and
       ``(ii) nominations reflecting partnerships and 
     comprehensive planning between State and local governments 
     and the private sector.
       ``(e) Limitations on Amount of Bonds Designated.--
       ``(1) National limitation.--There is a national technology 
     bond limitation for each calendar year. Such limitation is 
     $100,000,000 for 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006, and, 
     except as provided in paragraph (4), zero thereafter.
       ``(2) Allocation of limitation.--The national technology 
     bond limitation for a calendar year shall be allocated by the 
     Secretary among the qualified projects designated for such 
     year.
       ``(3) Designation subject to limitation amount.--The 
     maximum aggregate face amount of bonds issued during any 
     calendar year which may be designated under subsection (d)(1) 
     with respect to any qualified project shall not exceed the 
     limitation amount allocated to such project under paragraph 
     (2) for such calendar year.
       ``(4) Carryover of unused limitation.--If for any calendar 
     year--
       ``(A) the national technology limitation amount, exceeds
       ``(B) the amount of bonds issued during such year which are 
     designated under subsection (d)(1) with respect to qualified 
     projects, the national technology limitation amount for the 
     following calendar year shall be increased by the amount of 
     such excess.
       ``(f) Other Definitions.--For purposes of this subpart--
       ``(1) Bond.--The term `bond' includes any obligation.
       ``(2) Credit allowance date.--The term `credit allowance 
     date' means, with respect to any issue, the last day of the 
     1-year period beginning on the date of issuance of such issue 
     and the last day of each successive 1-year period thereafter.
       ``(3) State.--The term `State' means the several States and 
     the District of Columbia.
       ``(g) Credit Included in Gross Income.--Gross income 
     includes the amount of the credit allowed to the taxpayer 
     under this section (determined without regard to subsection 
     (c)) and the amount so included shall be treated as interest 
     income.
       ``(h) Other Special Rules.--
       ``(1) Paratnerhsip; s corporation; and other pass-thru 
     entities.--Under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, in 
     the case of a partnership, trust, S corporation, or other 
     pass-thru entity, rules similar to the rules of section 41(g) 
     shall apply with respect to the credit allowable under 
     subsection (a).
       ``(2) Bonds held by regulated investment companies.--If any 
     qualified technology bond is held by a regulated investment 
     company, the credit determined under subsection (a) shall be 
     allowed to shareholders of such company under procedures 
     prescribed by the Secretary.
       ``(3) Treatment for estimated tax purposes.--Solely for 
     purposes of sections 6654 and 6655, the credit allowed by 
     this section to a taxpayer by reason of holding a qualified 
     technology bond on a credit allowance date shall be treated 
     as if it were a payment of estimated tax made by the taxpayer 
     on such date.
       ``(4) Reporting.--Issuers of qualified technology bonds 
     shall submit reports similar to the reports required under 
     section 149(e).''.
       (b) Reporting.--Subsection (d) of section 6049 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to returns regarding 
     payments of interest) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(8) Reporting of credit on qualified technology bonds.--
       ``(A) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the term 
     `interest' includes amounts includible in gross income under 
     section 54(g) and such amounts shall be treated as paid on 
     the credit allowance date (as defined in section 54(f)(2)).
       ``(B) Reporting to corporations, etc.--Except as otherwise 
     provided in regulations, in the case of any interest 
     described in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, subsection 
     (b)(4) of this section shall be applied without regard to 
     subparagraphs (A), (H), (I), (J), (K), and (L)(i).
       ``(C) Regulatory authority.--the Secretary may prescribe 
     such regulations as are necessary or appropriate to carry out 
     the purposes of this paragraph, including regulations which 
     require more frequent or more detailed reporting.''.
       (c) Clerical Amendments.--
       (1) The table of subparts for part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new item:

``Subpart H. Nonrefundable Credit for Holders of Qualified Technology 
              Bonds.''

       (2) Section 6401(b)(1) of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``and G'' and inserting ``G, and H''.
       (d) Effective Date.--the amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to obligations issued after December 31, 2001.
                                  ____


                                 S. 427

       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 ``Small Business Jobs Tax 
     Credit Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) In many parts of the United States, segments of large 
     cities, smaller cities, and rural areas are experiencing 
     population loss and low job growth that hurt the surrounding 
     communities.
       (2) In areas hurt by low job growth, people are forced to 
     leave the communities they have lived in their whole life to 
     secure a job.
       (3) A small business tax credit to promote jobs in areas 
     suffering from low job growth and population loss would spur 
     economic growth and would provide incentives for businesses 
     to take advantage of an often underutilized, well-educated 
     workforce.
       (4) By promoting economic growth, such a tax credit would 
     revitalize these areas that are less likely to receive other 
     Federal investments.

     SEC. 3. EXPANSION OF WORK OPPORTUNITY TAX CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Section 51(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to members of targeted groups) is 
     amended by striking ``or'' at the end of subparagraph (G), by 
     striking the period at the end of subparagraph (H) and 
     inserting ``, or'', and by adding at the end the following:
       ``(I) a qualified small business employee.''.
       (b) Qualified Small Business Employee.--Section 51(d) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating 
     paragraphs (10) through (12) as paragraphs (11) through (13), 
     respectively, and by inserting after paragraph (9) the 
     following:
       ``(10) Qualified small business employee.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified small business 
     employee' means any individual--
       ``(i) hired by a qualified small business located in a 
     development zone, or
       ``(ii) hired by a qualified small business and who is 
     certified by the designated local agency as residing in such 
     a development zone.
       ``(B) Qualified small business.--The term `qualified small 
     business' has the meaning given the term `small employer' by 
     section 4980D(d)(2).
       ``(C) Development zone.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(i) In general.--The term `development zone' means any 
     area--

[[Page S1764]]

       ``(I) which is nominated under the procedures defined in 
     sections 1400E(a)(1)(A) and 1400E(a)(4) for renewal 
     communities;
       ``(II) which the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 
     designates as a development zone, after consultation with the 
     Secretary of Commerce;
       ``(III) which has a population of not less than 5,000 and 
     not more than 150,000;
       ``(IV) which has a poverty rate not less than 20 percent 
     (within the meaning of section 1400E(c)(3)(C));
       ``(V) which has an average annual rate of job growth of 
     less than 2 percent during any 3 years of the preceding 5-
     year period; and
       ``(VI) which, during the period beginning January 1, 1990 
     and ending with the date of the enactment of this Act, has a 
     net out-migration of inhabitants, or other population loss, 
     from the area of at least 2 percent of the population of the 
     area during such period.

       ``(ii) Number of designations.--The Secretary of Housing 
     and Urban Development may not designate more than 100 
     development zones.
       ``(D) Special rules for determining amount of credit.--For 
     purposes of applying this subpart to wages paid or incurred 
     to any qualified small business employee--
       ``(i) subsection (a) shall be applied by substituting ``20 
     percent of the qualified first, second, third, fourth, or 
     fifth year wages'' for ``40 percent of the qualified first 
     year wages'', and
       ``(ii) in lieu of paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (b), 
     the following definitions and special rule shall apply:

       ``(I) Qualified first-year wages.--The term `qualified 
     first-year wages' means, with respect to any individual, 
     qualified wages attributable to service rendered during the 
     1-year period beginning with the day the individual begins 
     work for the employer.
       ``(II) Qualified second-year wages.--The term `qualified 
     second-year wages' means, with respect to any individual, 
     qualified wages attributable to service rendered during the 
     1-year period beginning on the day after the last day of the 
     1-year period with respect to such individual determined 
     under subclause (I).
       ``(III) Qualified third-year wages.--The term `qualified 
     third-year wages' means, with respect to any individual, 
     qualified wages attributable to service rendered during the 
     1-year period beginning on the day after the last day of the 
     1-year period with respect to such individual determined 
     under subclause (II).
       ``(IV) Qualified fourth-year wages.--The term `qualified 
     fourth-year wages' means, with respect to any individual, 
     qualified wages attributable to service rendered during the 
     1-year period beginning on the day after the last day of the 
     1-year period with respect to such individual determined 
     under subclause (III).
       ``(V) Qualified fifth-year wages.--The term `qualified 
     fifth-year wages' means, with respect to any individual, 
     qualified wages attributable to service rendered during the 
     1-year period beginning on the day after the last day of the 
     1-year period with respect to such individual determined 
     under subclause (IV).
       ``(VI) Only first $15,000 of wages per year taken into 
     account.--The amount of the qualified first, second, third, 
     fourth, and fifth year wages which may be taken into account 
     with respect to any individual shall not exceed $15,000 per 
     year.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to individuals who begin work for the employer 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                  ____


                                 S. 428

       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 ``Broadband Expansion Grant 
     Initiative of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Investing in a telecommunications infrastructure for 
     underserved rural communities will increase the potential for 
     long-term economic growth in those areas.
       (2) Currently, too many families have to make long distance 
     calls to connect to the Internet, and the deployment of 
     broadband networks would make sure that connection to the 
     Internet is more cost-effective and only a local call away.
       (3) Small businesses would benefit from access to high-
     speed Internet links that would allow them to compete on 
     national and international levels.
       (4) Broadband deployment grants and loan guarantees would 
     encourage private-sector investment in infrastructure 
     advances.

     SEC. 3. FACILITATION OF DEPLOYMENT OF BROADBAND 
                   TELECOMMUNICATIONS CAPABILITIES TO UNDERSERVED 
                   RURAL AREAS.

       (a) In General.--In order to facilitate the deployment by 
     the private sector of broadband telecommunications networks 
     and capabilities (including wireless and satellite networks 
     and capabilities) to underserved rural areas, the Secretary 
     of Commerce (in this section, referred to as the 
     ``Secretary'') may--
       (1) make grants to eligible recipients for that purpose;
       (2) guarantee loans, either whole or in part, of eligible 
     recipients the proceeds of which are to be used for that 
     purpose; or
       (3) carry out activities under both paragraphs (1) and (2).
       (b) Eligible Recipients.--For purposes of this section, an 
     eligible recipient of a grant or loan guarantee under 
     subsection (a) is any person or entity selected by the 
     Secretary in accordance with such procedures as the Secretary 
     shall establish.
       (c) Underserved Rural Areas.--The Secretary shall identify 
     the areas that constitute underserved rural areas for 
     purposes of this section.
       (d) Emphasis on Particular Capabilities.--In selecting a 
     person or entity as an eligible recipient of a grant or loan 
     guarantee under subsection (a), the Secretary shall give 
     particular emphasis to persons or entities that propose to 
     use the grant or the proceeds of the loan guaranteed, as the 
     case may be, to leverage non-Federal resources to do one or 
     more of the following:
       (1) Provide underserved rural areas with access to Internet 
     service by local telephone.
       (2) Demonstrate new models or emerging technologies to 
     bring broadband telecommunications services to underserved 
     rural areas on a cost-effective basis.
       (3) Use broadband telecommunications services to stimulate 
     economic development, such as providing connections between 
     and among industrial parks located in such areas and 
     providing high-speed telecommunications service links to 
     small business incubators.
       (e) Consultation.--The Secretary may consult with the 
     Federal Communications Commission in carrying out activities 
     under this section.
       (f) Limitation on Amount.--The amount of any grants made 
     under this section, and the cost (as defined in section 
     502(5) of the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (2 U.S.C. 
     661a(5)) of any loans guaranteed under this section, may not, 
     in the aggregate, exceed $100,000,000.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Department of Commerce for 
     purposes of grants and loan guarantees under this section 
     $100,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, and such sums as are 
     necessary for each fiscal year thereafter.
                                  ____


                                 S. 429

       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 ``Technology Extension Act of 
     2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The Federal Government developed the Agriculture 
     Extension Program, and more recently, the Manufacturing 
     Extension Program to help farmers and small manufacturers 
     gain access to the latest technologies. Today's small and 
     medium-sized businesses need a technology extension program 
     that provides access to cutting edge technology.
       (2) There is a need to create partnerships to cut the time 
     it takes for new developments in university laboratories to 
     reach the manufacturing floor, to help small and medium-sized 
     businesses transform their innovations into jobs.
       (3) There is a need to build upon the Manufacturing 
     Extension Program to encourage the adoption of advanced 
     technology.

     SEC. 3. TECHNOLOGY EXTENSION PROGRAM.

       (a) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section--
       (1) to encourage meaningful use of the most advanced 
     available technologies by small businesses and medium-sized 
     businesses to the maximum extent possible to improve the 
     productivity of those businesses and thereby to promote 
     economic growth; and
       (2) to promote regional partnerships between educational 
     institutions and businesses to develop such technologies and 
     products in the surrounding areas.
       (b) Grant Program.--To achieve the purpose of this section, 
     the Secretary of Commerce (in this section, referred to as 
     the ``Secretary'') shall carry out a program to provide, 
     through grants, financial assistance for the establishment 
     and support of regional centers for the commercial use of 
     advanced technologies by small businesses and medium-sized 
     businesses.
       (c) Eligibility.--An entity is eligible to receive a grant 
     as a regional center under this section if the entity--
       (1) is affiliated with a United States-based institution or 
     organization that is operated on a not-for-profit basis, or 
     any combination of two or more of such institutions or 
     organizations;
       (2) offers to enter into an agreement with the Secretary to 
     function as a regional center for the commercial use of 
     advanced technologies for the purpose of this section within 
     a region determined appropriate by the Secretary; and
       (3) demonstrates that it has the capabilities necessary to 
     achieve the purpose of this section through its operations as 
     a center within that region.
       (d) Selection of Applicants.--
       (1) Competitive process.--The Secretary shall use a 
     competitive process for the awarding of grants under this 
     section and, under that process, select recipients of the 
     grants on the basis of merit, with priority given to 
     underserved areas.
       (2) Applications for grants.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     the form and content of applications required for grants 
     under this section.
       (e) Specific Activities of Regional Centers.--A regional 
     center may use the proceeds of a grant under this section for 
     any

[[Page S1765]]

     activity that carries out the purpose of this section, 
     including such activities as the following:
       (1) Assist small businesses and medium-sized businesses to 
     address their most critical needs for the application of the 
     latest technology, improvement of infrastructure, and use of 
     best business practices.
       (2) In conjunction with institutions of higher education 
     and laboratories located in the region, transfer technologies 
     to small businesses and medium-sized businesses located in 
     such region to create jobs and increase production in 
     surrounding areas.
       (f) Addition Administrative Authorities.--
       (1) Cost-sharing.--The Secretary may require the recipient 
     of a grant to defray, out of funds available from sources 
     other than the Federal Government, a specific level of the 
     operating expenses of the regional center for which the grant 
     is made.
       (2) Additional terms and conditions.--The Secretary, in 
     awarding a grant, may impose any other terms and conditions 
     for the use of the proceeds of the grant that the Secretary 
     determines appropriate for carrying out the purpose of this 
     section and to protect the interests of the United States.
       (g) Definitions of Small Business and Medium-Sized 
     Business.--
       (1) Secretary to prescribe.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     the definitions of the terms ``small business'' and ``medium-
     sized business'' for the purpose of this section.
       (2) Small business standards.--In defining the term ``small 
     business'', the Secretary shall apply the standards 
     applicable for the definition of the term ``small-business 
     concern'' under section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 
     U.S.C. 632).
       (h) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe regulations 
     for the grant program administered under this section.
       (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Department of Commerce for 
     carrying out this section $125,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, 
     and such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year 
     thereafter.
                                  ____

       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 ``Broadband Rural Research 
     Investment Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress find the following:
       (1) The availability of broadband telecommunications 
     services in rural America is critical to economic 
     development, job creation, and new services such as distance 
     learning and telemedicine.
       (2) Existing broadband technology cannot be deployed in 
     many rural areas, either because of technical limitations, or 
     the cost of deployment relative to the available market.
       (3) Research in new broadband technology that addresses 
     these barriers could increase the availability of broadband 
     telecommunications services in rural areas.

     SEC. 3. RESEARCH ON ENHANCEMENT OF BROADBAND 
                   TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--The Director of the National Science 
     Foundation (in this section, referred to as the ``Director'') 
     shall carry out research on the following:
       (1) Means of enhancing or facilitating the availability of 
     broadband telecommunications services in rural areas and 
     other remote areas.
       (2) Means of facilitating or enhancing access to the 
     Internet through broadband telecommunications services.
       (b) Scope of Authority.--The Director may carry out 
     research under subsection (a) within the National Science 
     Foundation or pursuant to such grants, agreements, or other 
     arrangements as the Director considers appropriate.
       (c) Results of Research.--The Director shall make available 
     to the public, in such manner as the Director considers 
     appropriate, the results of any research carried out under 
     this section.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated for the National Science Foundation for 
     purposes of activities under this section $25,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as are necessary for each 
     fiscal year thereafter.
                                  ____


                                 S. 431

       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 ``Regional Skills Alliances 
     Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       (1) Many small businesses lack the financial capacity to 
     support the training of high-skilled workers.
       (2) Many high-tech companies concerned about worker 
     training consider recruiting employees from overseas because 
     a shortage of information technology workers remains a 
     significant problem.
       (3) Too many highly educated workers in underserved 
     communities do not have the specialized skills needed to meet 
     the needs of local businesses.
       (4) Regional skills alliances bring businesses and 4-year 
     colleges and universities and community colleges together to 
     help develop and implement effective programs to make sure 
     workers have the training needed to compete in the modern 
     workplace.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITION.

       In this Act, the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of 
     Labor.

                         TITLE I--SKILL GRANTS

     SEC. 101. AUTHORIZATION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Commerce, shall award grants to eligible 
     entities described in subsection (b) to assist such entities 
     to improve the job skills necessary for employment in 
     specific industries.
       (b) Elgible Entities Described.--
       (1) In general.--An eligible entity described in this 
     subsection is a consortium that--
       (A) shall consist of representatives from not less than 5 
     businesses, or a lesser number of businesses if such lesser 
     number of businesses employs at least 30 percent of the 
     employees in the industry involved in the region (or a non-
     profit organization that represents such businesses);
       (B) may consist of representatives from--
       (i) labor organizations;
       (ii) State and local government; and
       (iii) educational institutions;
       (C) is established to serve one or more particular 
     industries; and
       (D) is established to serve a particular geographic region.
       (2) Majority of representatives.--A majority of the 
     representatives described in paragraph (1)(A).
       (c) Priority for Small Businesses.--In providing grants 
     under subsection (a), the Secretary shall give priority to an 
     eligible entity if a majority of representatives forming the 
     entity represent small-business concerns (as defined in 
     section 3(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)).
       (d) Maximum Amount of Grant.--The amount of a grant awarded 
     to an eligible entity under subsection (a) may not exceed 
     $1,000,000 for any fiscal year.

     SEC. 102. USE OF AMOUNTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may not award a grant under 
     section 101 to an eligible entity unless such entity agrees 
     to use amounts received from such grant to improve the job 
     skills necessary for employment by businesses in the industry 
     with respect to which such entity was established.
       (b) Conduct of Program.--
       (1) In general.--In carrying out the program described in 
     subsection (a), the eligible entity may provide for--
       (A) an assessment of training and job skill needs for the 
     industry;
       (B) the development of a sequence of skill standards that 
     are benchmarked to advanced industry practices;
       (C) the development of curriculum and training methods, 
     including, where appropriate, e-learning or technology-based 
     training;
       (D) the purchase, lease, or receipt of donations of 
     training equipment;
       (E) the identification of training providers and the 
     development of partnerships between the industry and 
     educational institutions, including community colleges;
       (F) the development of apprenticeship programs;
       (G) the development of training programs for workers, 
     including dislocated workers;
       (H) the development of training plans for businesses; and
       (I) the development of the membership of the entity.
       (2) Additional requirement.--In carrying out the program 
     described in subsection (a), the eligible entity shall 
     provide for the development and tracking of performance 
     outcome measures for the program and the training providers 
     involved in the program.
       (c) Administrative Costs.--The eligible entity may use not 
     more than 10 percent of the amount of a grant to pay for 
     administrative costs associated with the program described in 
     subsection (a).

     SEC. 103. REQUIREMENT OF MATCHING FUNDS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may not award a grant under 
     section 101 to an eligible entity unless such entity agrees 
     that the entity will make available non-Federal contributions 
     toward the costs of carrying out activities under the grant 
     in an amount that is not less than $2 for each $1 of Federal 
     funds provided under the grant, of which--
       (1) $1 shall be provided by the businesses participating in 
     the entity; and
       (2) $1 shall be provided by the State or local government 
     involved.
       (b) Other Contributions.--
       (1) Equipment.--Equipment donations to facilities that are 
     not owned or operated by the members of the eligible entity 
     involved and that are shared by such members may be included 
     in determining compliance with subsection (a).
       (2) Limitation.--An eligible entity may not include in-kind 
     contributions in complying with the requirement of subsection 
     (a). The Secretary may consider such donations in ranking 
     applications.

     SEC. 104. LIMIT ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

       The Secretary may use not more than 5 percent of the 
     amounts made available to carry out this title to pay the 
     Federal administrative costs associated with awarding grants 
     under this title.

     SEC. 105 AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $50,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2002, 2003, 
     and 2004, and such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year 
     thereafter.

                       TITLE II--PLANNING GRANTS

     SEC. 201. AUTHORIZATION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the 
     Secretary of Commerce,

[[Page S1766]]

     shall award grants to States to enable such states to assist 
     businesses, organizations, and agencies described in section 
     101(b) in conducting planning to form consortia described in 
     such section.
       (b) Maximum Amount of Grant.--The amount of a grant awarded 
     to a State under subjection (a) may not exceed $500,000 for 
     any fiscal year.

     SEC. 202. APPLICATION.

       The Secretary may not award a grant under section 201 to a 
     State unless such State submits to the Secretary an 
     application at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may reasonably require.

     SEC. 203. REQUIREMENT OF MATCHING FUNDS.

       The Secretary may not award a grant under section 201 to a 
     State unless such State agrees that it will make available 
     non-Federal contributions toward the costs of carrying out 
     activities under this title in an amount that is not less 
     than $1 for each $1 of Federal funds provided under the 
     grant.

     SEC. 204. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $5,000,000 for fiscal year 2002.
                                  ____


                                 S. 432

       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 ``Entrepreneurial Incubators 
     Development Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) While small businesses have been an engine of economic 
     growth over the past decade, they often lack access to the 
     technology available to larger businesses.
       (2) Business incubators have proven an effective source of 
     economic growth in the States.
       (3) Scientific discoveries need to be quickly converted 
     into job and community ventures.

     SEC. 3. GRANTS FOR SUPPORT OF BUSINESS INCUBATOR ACTIVITIES.

       (a) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this section to 
     encourage entrepreneurial creativity and risk taking through 
     the support of the furnishing of business incubator services 
     for newly established small businesses and medium-sized 
     businesses.
       (b) Grant Program.--to achieve the purpose of this section, 
     the Secretary of Commerce (in this section, referred to as 
     the ``Secretary'') shall carry out a program to provide, 
     through grants, financial assistance for the establishment 
     and support of entities that provide business incubator 
     services in support of the initiation and initial sustainment 
     of business activities by newly established small businesses 
     and medium-sized businesses.
       (c) Awards of Grants.--
       (1) Eligibility requirements.--The Secretary shall 
     prescribe the eligibility requirements for the awarding of 
     grants under this section.
       (2) Competitive selection.--The Secretary shall use a 
     competitive process for the awarding of grants under this 
     section and, under that process, select recipients of the 
     grant son the basis of merit, with priority given to 
     underserved rural and urban communities.
       (3) Applications for grants.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     the form and content of applications required for grants 
     under this section.
       (d) Additional Administrative Authorities.--
       (1) Cost-sharing.--The Secretary may require the recipient 
     of a grant under this section to defray a specific level of 
     its operating expenses for business incubator services out of 
     funds available from sources other than the Federal 
     Government.
       (2) Additional terms and conditions.--The Secretary, in 
     awarding a grant, may impose any other terms and conditions 
     for the use of the proceeds of the grant that the Secretary 
     determines appropriate for carrying out the purpose of this 
     section and to protect the interests of the United States, 
     including the requirement that entities providing business 
     incubator services that receive a grant under this section 
     develop a plan for ultimately becoming self-sufficient.
       (e) Definitions.--
       (1) Business incubator services.--In this section, the term 
     ``business incubator services'' includes professional and 
     technical services necessary for the initiation and initial 
     sustainment of operations of a newly established business, 
     including such services as the following:
       (A) Legal services.--Legal services, including aid in 
     preparing corporate charters, partnership agreements, and 
     basic contracts.
       (B) Intellectual property services.--Services in support of 
     the protection of intellectual property through patents, 
     trademarks, or otherwise.
       (C) Technology services.--Services in support of the 
     acquisition and use of advanced technology, including the use 
     of Internet services and web-based services.
       (D) Planning.--Advice on--
       (i) strategic planning; and
       (ii) marketing, including advertising.
       (2) Small business and medium-sized business.--
       (A) Secretary to prescribe.--The Secretary shall prescribe 
     the definitions of the terms ``small business'' and ``medium-
     sized business'' for the purpose of this section.
       (B) Small business standards.--In defining the term ``small 
     business'' for the purpose of this section, the Secretary 
     shall apply the standards applicable for the definition of 
     the term ``small business concern'' under section 3 of the 
     Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632).
       (f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe regulations 
     for the grant program administered under this section.
       (g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated for the Department of Commerce for 
     carrying out this section $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, 
     and $200,000,000 for each fiscal year thereafter.
                                  ____


      Economic Development Proposals for the New Economy--Summary

       In too many parts of America, many of our communities are 
     plagued by low job growth and economic stagnation. These 
     communities, which historically have been the backbone of our 
     nation, are deeply concerned about their economic prospects. 
     This package of incentives focuses on encouraging new 
     technology companies to move to places where they can take 
     advantage of a well-educated workforce and a higher education 
     infrastructure that is often available and underutilized.
       Technology Bonds: In order to help states and local 
     governments invest in telecommunications infrastructure, this 
     proposal invests $100 million a year in a new type of tax 
     incentive: Technology Bonds. Localities would be allowed to 
     use Technology Bonds to expand high-speed Internet access in 
     their communities. These bonds would provide a significant 
     incentive to state and local governments because they would 
     not have to pay any interest on them, and, thus, would make 
     no payments until maturity (15 years in the future). Because 
     the program directs its benefits to communities, it will 
     better ensure that higher need communities receive the 
     benefits.
       Small Business Jobs Tax Credit: This tax credit for small 
     businesses will promote jobs in smaller communities. This 
     proposal will provide a tax credit for wages, up to $3,000 
     per employee, for small businesses that locate in communities 
     that are losing population, have low job growth rates and 
     high poverty rates. Specifically, this proposal creates a 20% 
     tax credit for wages of up to $15,000 per year, which is a 
     value of up to $3,000 per employee, companies could receive 
     the credit for up to five years. This initiative will focus 
     on smaller communities by targeting communities with a 
     population over 5,000. The program would designate roughly 
     100 communities and could subsidize roughly 8,000 jobs for 
     each area.
       Broadband Expansion Grant Initiative of 2001: This proposal 
     complements Tech Bonds by creating a $100 million initiative 
     to accelerate private-sector deployment of broadband networks 
     in under-served rural communities. Right now many families 
     have to make long distances calls to connect to Internet. 
     This initiative will support $100 million in grants and loan 
     guarantees to ensure the Internet is more cost-effective and 
     only a local call away. It will connect industrial parks and 
     small business incubators with high-speed links; and 
     encourage trials of innovative deployment of broadband 
     networks to provide cost-effective access to rural areas.
       Technology Extension Act of 2001: During the early part of 
     this century, the Federal government helped farmers gain 
     access to new agricultural technologies through the 
     Agriculture Extension Program at the Department of 
     Agriculture. More recently, the Department of Commerce has 
     successfully helped small manufacturers with new technologies 
     through its Manufacturing Extension Program. Now it is time 
     to provide small and medium-sized businesses with a 
     technology extension program that provides the latest 
     technology to improve productivity and promote economic 
     growth. This initiative will build upon the Manufacturing 
     Extension Program to address critical needs in areas such as 
     technology applications, infrastructure upgrades and business 
     practices, insurance and other forms. It would also work with 
     universities and laboratories to transfer technologies to 
     small and medium-sized businesses that will help them move 
     products to markets faster. This program would be funded at 
     $25 million the first year, growing to $125 million in fiscal 
     year 2002.
       Broadband Rural Research Investment Act of 2001: This 
     proposal targets $25 million in funding for research to 
     ensure the availability of broadband in rural areas. This 
     proposal supports additional investments at the National 
     Science Foundation for research in new broadband technology 
     to increase the availability of broadband telecommunications 
     services in remote and rural areas.
       Regional Skills Alliances: Throughout the nation, high-tech 
     companies often consider recruiting employees from overseas 
     because a shortage of information technology workers remains 
     a significant problem throughout the state. Too many small 
     firms do not have the resources to train the workers they 
     need. This proposals creates Regional Skills Alliances to 
     bring businesses, schools, and community college together to 
     help create effective programs to ensure workers have the 
     training needed to compete in the new economy. Without some 
     kind of support to create alliances, small firms just don't 
     have the time or resources to collaborate with anybody on 
     training. In fact, almost all existing RSA's report that they 
     would not have been able to get off the ground without an

[[Page S1767]]

     independent, staffed entity to operate the alliance.
       Entrepreneurial Incubators: This initiative would help 
     entrepreneurs who have good ideas but cannot afford lawyers 
     and consultants to access the help they need with legal 
     complexities such as preparing corporate charters, 
     partnership agreements, contracts, patent and intellectual 
     property rules, and basic marketing strategies. This will 
     especially help areas where universities can be key 
     collaborators in entrepreneurial incubators. This proposal 
     would initially invest $50 million and up to $200 million the 
     following years, to increase business incubators nationally 
     by a third.
                                  ____


                      [From the Associated Press]

               How Does Upstate Keep Best and Brightest?

                           (By Michael Hill)

       Albany, NY.--Jaclyn Welcher's college degree turned out to 
     be a one-way ticket out of upstate New York.
       After graduating from Siena College near Albany in 1998, 
     Welcher tried to apply her marketing and management degree to 
     a job around her parents' home in Queensbury. It didn't work 
     out.
       ``I said: `There's no point in this at all,' '' Welcher 
     recalled, ``I'm outta here!'' Welcher--now 24 and working in 
     Los Angeles--is far from the only twenty-something to leave 
     upstate New York.
       Young New Yorkers have long been leaving for bigger 
     paychecks and jazzier lifestyles in places like Boston, 
     Austin and Atlanta. The exodus is considered a serious 
     problem because young people are a vital cog in local 
     economies--they take entry-level jobs, spend money and add 
     vibrancy to an area. Employers and local officials have 
     become concerned enough to try out some new strategies to 
     attract and retain young workers.
       Updated U.S. Census figures tracking local population 
     changes by age won't be available until later this year. 
     However, interviews with recent college graduates, employers 
     and local leaders across New York reveal a widespread 
     perception that upstate areas struggle in the competition for 
     young workers.
       Part of the problem is higher salaries offered elsewhere 
     for certain jobs. For instance, the mean 1998 salary for a 
     computer engineer in Rochester area was $54,910; it was 
     $62,930 in the Raleigh-Durham-Chapel Hill area of North 
     Carolina, according to federal Bureau of Labor Statistics 
     data.
       Lower pay can be mitigated by a relatively inexpensive 
     costs of living--three-bedroom houses in Buffalo or Syracuse 
     areas can be purchased for under $100,000. Albany Molecular 
     Research Inc. Vice President James Grates said when he tells 
     potential recruits in Berkeley that homes in the Albany area 
     can go for $90,000-$110,000--two or three times less than 
     similar houses in the Bay Area of California--``their jaws 
     drop to the table.''
       But inexpensive housing is a bigger draw for workers ready 
     to settle down and have a family. People in their 20s have 
     been known to have other priorities--like being around other 
     people in their 20s.
       ``California, Boston, Texas--they have some glitter to 
     them. Fancy nightclubs, bars, sports bars, restaurants, 
     entertainment . . . the perception is here we don't have as 
     much of that,'' said Rochester Institute of Technology 
     President Albert Simone.
       Take Atlanta, where Jonathan Cancro reports that there are 
     so many of his fellow University of Buffalo graduates that 
     he's helping start a local chapter of the college's alumni 
     association. One obvious sign of the Buffalo connection, 
     Cancro said, is the number of bars catering to Bills fans.
       ``There are tons of people down here from New York,'' said 
     the 30-year-old Long Island native. ``Not just UB.''
       The twentysomething exodus has been serious enough to show 
     up on some politicians' radar. Erie County Executive Joel 
     Giambra ran a successful campaign in 1999 on the slogan 
     ``Keep Our Kids.'' Sen. Hilliary Rodham Clinton also lamented 
     the loss of young people from New York while on the campaign 
     trail last year.
       Employers have noticed too, and have tried to sweeten the 
     pot for young people. A survey last year by the Business 
     Council of New York State employers bumping up starting pay 
     and hastening first raises.
       Companies also are experimenting with benefits that might 
     be attractive to younger, childless workers. Media Logic, a 
     marketing and advertising firm in Albany, includes yoga and 
     stress classes as part of its employees benefits package.
       Meanwhile, business groups in several cities are 
     strengthening their links to local colleges in hopes in 
     grabbing graduates to fill job slots.
       In Sycrause, the Metropolitan Development Association is 
     spending $550,000 in state grant money for summer internship 
     programs aimed at keeping area college students in the region 
     after graduation.
       In Rochester, presidents of a number of area schools--
     including RIT, the University of Rochester and the state 
     universities at Geneseo and Brockport--have met with local 
     employers to find ways to make it easier for small- and 
     medium-sized businesses to recruit local talent.
       In Albany, the Center for Economic Growth plans to bring 
     together business leaders, students and maybe even guidance 
     counselors to start dialogues on what young graduates look 
     for in an employer.
       ``To tell a 22-year-old freshly minted college graduate 
     that the reason they should come to work for my company is 
     because I have this incredible 401k plan--it's probably not 
     going to raise their eyebrows and make them go `Yahoo!' '' 
     said center President Kelly Lovell. Also, there are new signs 
     of nightlife in many old upstate cities, be it brew pubs or 
     couch-crammed coffee houses. Buffalo's Chippewa Street might 
     be the most dramatic transformation--once notorious for its 
     sex trade, it is now a gentrified strip packed with bars, 
     dance clubs and restaurants.
       Syracuse also is showing signs of rebirth, said super 
     booster Jeff Brown. The 36-year-old lawyer is helping start a 
     unique program to draw young people back to his hometown. 
     Under the ``Come Home to Sycrause'' program volunteers will 
     work off of alumni lists from local colleges and high 
     schools, contacting young expatriates to see if they want to 
     come back. The volunteers will help returnees network for 
     jobs.
       A web site is planned and there's already a toll-free 
     number: 1-866-BAK-2SYR. Brown seems qualified for the job. He 
     was once one of those young people who left, in his case for 
     Washington D.C. Brown said he liked the hubbub but missed his 
     home community. ``At some point in your life,'' he said, 
     ``you realize there's something more to life than 20 
     different Ethiopian restaurants.''
                                  ____


                 [From the New York Post, Mar. 1, 2001]

               New York's Job Growth Again Tops U.S. Rate

                          (By Kenneth Lovett)

       Albany.--Spurred by a surge in New York City, job growth in 
     the state surpassed the nation's average, for the second 
     straight year, in 2000.
       The total number of jobs in the state grew by 2.3 percent 
     last year, compared with the national average of 2.1 percent, 
     the state Labor Department reported yesterday. New York's 4.2 
     percent unemployment rate in January matched the nation's for 
     the first time in nearly a decade.
       The city had a 5.6 percent unemployment rate in January, 
     down from 5.9 percent in December and 6.4 percent last 
     January.
       Overall, New York had 7.168 million private-sector jobs in 
     January, the highest number on record.
       ``Our policies have better positioned New York to fend off 
     a national economic slowdown,'' Gov. Pataki said. Mayor 
     Giuliani recently said the city was the ``economic 
     engine'' for the state as a whole. The numbers seem to 
     back him up.
       New York City saw a 3.3-percent increase in jobs last year, 
     by far the largest jump in the state.
       Upstate saw 1.2 percent growth, significantly lower than 
     the state average.
       Large urban regions like Buffalo-Niagara Falls, Syracuse 
     and Rochester saw jobs grow by only .3 percent, .9 percent 
     and 1.1 percent, respectively.
       The health of the upstate economy looms as a major issue in 
     next year's gubernatorial race. Republican Rick Lazio drew 
     heavy criticism last year when he downplayed the region's 
     economic woes in his failed Senate bid against Hillary Rodham 
     Clinton.
       Democrats have already targeted the upstate economy as one 
     of the primary issues they will use against Pataki next year.

  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss a growing crisis 
in America's rural communities. We live in a time of balanced budgets, 
large surpluses, record unemployment, and average wages rising across 
the country. However, this wealth is not universal across the United 
States. Our rural areas are suffering the exact opposite effect with 
large outmigration and negative job growth. My highest priority is 
reversing this trend, stimulating economic growth and bringing higher 
paying jobs to my home State of Montana. I am pleased to join Senator 
Clinton in introducing economic development legislation that is 
targeted to the areas of greatest need, our rural communities.
  Our Nation has enjoyed unparalleled economic prosperity during the 
past decade. However, the boom on Wall Street has not extended to Main 
Street, MT. The rural areas of America and Montana have endured 
increased unemployment, the loss of family farms, and the transition 
from a traditional economy based on natural resources to a new economy 
where information and technology are highly valued. The effects have 
been disastrous. Small businesses, which are essential components of 
community, have been driven under as people have been forced to make 
the most difficult choice of all and leave their home towns seeking a 
new and better paying job.
  In Montana, the problems are actually worse. Statewide, we are 
suffering. Comparatively we rank forty-seventh in per-capita personal 
income and second in the number of people holding more than one job. 
With such a massive economic down-turn, State and local governments are 
left unable to assist in this economic transition simply due to a lack 
of funding. The private sector invests where it can, but

[[Page S1768]]

there is not a company in existence that could finance the investment 
necessary to bring essential technology to sparsely populated areas.
  Many of our small towns are left without hope because they are faced 
with no alternative to the current situation. The tools that are 
necessary to compete in the new economy are just not available to rural 
communities and the means to attain them do not exist. If rural America 
is to survive, we are charged with finding a way for these communities 
to compete on an equal footing with the more populous areas of this 
country and the world.
  That is the intent of the legislative package that we are introducing 
today. In the same spirit that brought electricity and basic telephone 
service to our rural communities, we propose a mechanism for bringing 
broadband capabilities, cutting-edge technology equipment, and 
incentives for bringing new business to communities and regions that 
have been left behind.
  The issues addressed by this legislation strike to the heart of the 
most pressing problems in my home State of Montana. Especially in 
Eastern Montana, the so-called ``Digital Divide'' is very real and 
presents a significant obstacle to economic growth and prosperity. 
Specifically, the Broadband Deployment Initiative and the Technology 
Extension Program will not only provide an incentive to the private 
sector to bring cutting-edge technology to the most rural areas, they 
will also provide the technical expertise to allow small and medium 
businesses to use these new tools to their maximum potential. They will 
be fully equipped to compete in a global economy.
  I look forward to seeing this bipartisan legislation through Congress 
and enacted into law. I encourage my colleagues to assist us in this 
endeavor. It is our duty to ensure that all regions of America have a 
chance to achieve economic prosperity and have access to the necessary 
instruments of success.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DASCHLE (for himself, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Hagel):
  S. 434. A bill to provide equitable compensation to the Yankton Sioux 
Tribe of South Dakota and the Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska for the 
loss of value of certain lands; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am joining with Senators Tim 
Johnson and Chuck Hagel to introduce legislation to compensate the 
Yankton Sioux Tribe of South Dakota and the Santee Sioux Tribe of 
Nebraska for losses the tribes suffered when the Fort Randall and 
Gavins Point dams were constructed on the Missouri River over four 
decades ago.
  As a result of the construction of these dams, more than 3,259 acres 
of land owned by the Yankton Sioux Tribe were flooded or subsequently 
lost to erosion. Also, approximately 600 acres of land located near the 
Santee village and 400 acres on the Niobrara Island of the Santee Sioux 
Tribe Indian Reservation were flooded. The flooding of these fertile 
lands struck a significant blow to the economies of these tribes, a 
loss for which they have never been adequately compensated. This 
legislation attempts to redress that unfortunate reality by providing 
the tribes resources to rebuild their infrastructure and strengthen 
their economies.
  To appreciate fully the need for this legislation, it is important to 
understand history. The Fort Randall and Gavins Point dams were 
constructed in South Dakota pursuant to the Flood Control Act (58 Stat. 
887) of 1944. That legislation authorized implementation of the 
Missouri River Basin Pick-Sloan Plan for water development and flood 
control for downstream states.
  The Fort Randall dam, which was an integral part of the Pick-Sloan 
project, initially flooded 2,851 acres of tribal land, forcing the 
relocation and resettlement of numerous families, including the 
traditional and self-sustaining community of White Swan, one of the 
four major settlement areas on the reservation. On other reservations, 
such as Crow Creek, Lower Brule, Cheyenne River, Standing Rock and Fort 
Berthold, communities affected by the Pick-Sloan dams were relocated to 
higher ground. In contract, the White Swan community was completely 
dissolved and its residents dispersed to whatever areas they could 
settle and start again.
  The bill I am introducing today, the Yankton Sioux Tribe and Santee 
Sioux Tribe of Nebraska Development Trust Fund Act, follows the 
precedent established over the last ten years by a series of laws that 
address similar claims by other tribes in South Dakota for losses 
caused by the Pick-Sloan dams. In 1992, Congress granted the Three 
Affiliated Tribes of Fort Berthold Reservation and the Standing Rock 
Sioux Tribe compensation for direct damages, including lost reservation 
infrastructure, relocation and resettlement expenses, the general 
rehabilitation of the tribes and unfulfilled government commitments 
regarding replacement facilities. In 1996, Congress enacted legislation 
compensating the Crow Creek tribe for its losses and in 1997 
legislation was enacted to compensate the Lower Brule tribe. Last year, 
the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe also received compensation.
  The Yankton Sioux Tribe and Santee Sioux Tribe have not yet received 
fair compensation for their losses. Their time has come.
  The flooding caused by the Pick-Sloan projects touched every aspect 
of life on the Yankton and Santee Sioux reservations, as large portions 
of their communities were forced to relocate wherever they could find 
shelter. These effects were never fully considered when the federal 
government was acquiring these lands or designing the Pick-Sloan 
projects.
  The Yankton Sioux Tribe and Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska 
Development Trust Fund Act represents an important element of our 
continuing effort to compensate fairly the tribes of the Missouri River 
Basin for the sacrifices they made decades ago for the construction of 
the dams. Passage of this legislation will not only right a historic 
wrong, but in doing so it will also improve the lives of Native 
Americans living on these reservations.
  It took decades for Congress to recognize the government's 
unfulfilled federal obligation to compensate the tribes for the effects 
of the construction of the Fort Randall and Gavins Point dams. We 
cannot, of course, reclaim the productive lands lost to those projects 
which are now covered with water and return them to the tribes. We can, 
however, help replace the forsaken economic potential of those lands by 
providing resources to improve the infrastructure on the reservations. 
This approach, in turn, will enhance opportunities for economic 
development that will benefit all members of the tribe.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to approve the Yankton Sioux Tribe and 
Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska Development Trust Fund Act this year. 
Providing compensation to the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the Santee Sioux 
Tribe of Nebraska for past economic harm inflicted by the federal 
government is long overdue, and further delay only compounds that harm. 
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. 434

       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 ``Yankton Sioux Tribe and 
     Santee Sioux Tribe Equitable Compensation Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) by enacting the Act of December 22, 1944, commonly 
     known as the ``Flood Control Act of 1944'' (58 Stat. 887, 
     chapter 665; 33 U.S.C. 701-1 et seq.) Congress approved the 
     Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin program (referred to in this 
     section as the ``Pick-Sloan program'')--
       (A) to promote the general economic development of the 
     United States;
       (B) to provide for irrigation above Sioux City, Iowa;
       (C) to protect urban and rural areas from devastating 
     floods of the Missouri River; and
       (D) for other purposes;
       (2) the waters impounded for the Fort Randall and Gavins 
     Point projects of the Pick-Sloan program have inundated the 
     fertile, wooded bottom lands along the Missouri River that 
     constituted the most productive agricultural and pastoral 
     lands of, and the homeland of, the members of the Yankton 
     Sioux Tribe and the Santee Sioux Tribe;
       (3) the Fort Randall project (including the Fort Randall 
     Dam and Reservoir) overlies the western boundary of the 
     Yankton Sioux Tribe Indian Reservation;
       (4) the Gavins Point project (including the Gavins Point 
     Dam and Reservoir) overlies

[[Page S1769]]

     the eastern boundary of the Santee Sioux Tribe;
       (5) although the Fort Randall and Gavins Point projects are 
     major components of the Pick-Sloan program, and contribute to 
     the economy of the United States by generating a substantial 
     amount of hydropower and impounding a substantial quantity of 
     water, the reservations of the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the 
     Santee Sioux Tribe remain undeveloped;
       (6) the United States Army Corps of Engineers took the 
     Indian lands used for the Fort Randall and Gavins Point 
     projects by condemnation proceedings;
       (7) the Federal Government did not give Yankton Sioux Tribe 
     and the Santee Sioux Tribe an opportunity to receive 
     compensation for direct damages from the Pick-Sloan program, 
     even though the Federal Government gave 5 Indian reservations 
     upstream from the reservations of those Indian tribes such an 
     opportunity;
       (8) the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the Santee Sioux Tribe did 
     not receive just compensation for the taking of productive 
     agricultural Indian lands through the condemnation referred 
     to in paragraph (6);
       (9) the settlement agreement that the United States entered 
     into with the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the Santee Sioux Tribe 
     to provide compensation for the taking by condemnation 
     referred to in paragraph (6) did not take into account the 
     increase in property values over the years between the date 
     of taking and the date of settlement; and
       (10) in addition to the financial compensation provided 
     under the settlement agreements referred to in paragraph 
     (9)--
       (A) the Yankton Sioux Tribe should receive an aggregate 
     amount equal to $23,023,743 for the loss value of 2,851.40 
     acres of Indian land taken for the Fort Randall Dam and 
     Reservoir of the Pick-Sloan program; and
       (B) the Santee Sioux Tribe should receive an aggregate 
     amount equal to $4,789,010 for the loss value of 593.10 acres 
     of Indian land located near the Santee village.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given that term in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
     450b(e)).
       (2) Santee sioux tribe.--The term ``Santee Sioux Tribe'' 
     means the Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska.
       (3) Yankton sioux tribe.--The term Yankton Sioux Tribe'' 
     means the Yankton Sioux Tribe of South Dakota.

     SEC. 4. YANKTON SIOUX TRIBE DEVELOPMENT TRUST FUND.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury of 
     the United States a fund to be known as the ``Yankton Sioux 
     Tribe Development Trust Fund'' (referred to in this section 
     as the ``Fund''). The Fund shall consist of any amounts 
     deposited in the Fund under this Act.
       (b) Funding.--On the first day of the 11th fiscal year that 
     begins after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
     of the Treasury shall, from the General Fund of the Treasury, 
     deposit into the Fund established under subsection (a)--
       (1) $23,023,743; and
       (2) an additional amount that equals the amount of interest 
     that would have accrued on the amount described in paragraph 
     (1) if such amount had been invested in interest-bearing 
     obligations of the United States, or in obligations 
     guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the United 
     States, on the first day of the first fiscal year that begins 
     after the date of enactment of this Act and compounded 
     annually thereafter.
       (c) Investment of Trust Fund.--It shall be the duty of the 
     Secretary of the Treasury to invest such portion of the Fund 
     as is not, in the Secretary of Treasury's judgment, required 
     to meet current withdrawals. Such investments may be made 
     only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States or 
     in obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest 
     by the United States. The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     deposit interest resulting from such investments into the 
     Fund.
       (d) Payment of Interest to Tribe.--
       (1) Withdrawal of interest.--Beginning on the first day of 
     the 11th fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act 
     and, on the first day of each fiscal year thereafter, the 
     Secretary of the Treasury shall withdraw the aggregate amount 
     of interest deposited into the Fund for that fiscal year and 
     transfer that amount to the Secretary of the Interior for use 
     in accordance with paragraph (2). Each amount so transferred 
     shall be available without fiscal year limitation.
       (2) Payments to yankton sioux tribe.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall use 
     the amounts transferred under paragraph (1) only for the 
     purpose of making payments to the Yankton Sioux Tribe, as 
     such payments are requested by that Indian tribe pursuant to 
     tribal resolution.
       (B) Limitation.--Payments may be made by the Secretary of 
     the Interior under subparagraph (A) only after the Yankton 
     Sioux Tribe has adopted a tribal plan under section 6.
       (C) Use of payments by yankton sioux tribe.--The Yankton 
     Sioux Tribe shall use the payments made under subparagraph 
     (A) only for carrying out projects and programs under the 
     tribal plan prepared under section 6.
       (e) Transfers and Withdrawals.--Except as provided in 
     subsections (c) and (d)(1), the Secretary of the Treasury may 
     not transfer or withdraw any amount deposited under 
     subsection (b).

     SEC. 5. SANTEE SIOUX TRIBE DEVELOPMENT TRUST FUND.

       (a) Establishment.--There is established in the Treasury of 
     the United States a fund to be known as the ``Santee Sioux 
     Tribe Development Trust Fund'' (referred to in this section 
     as the ``Fund''). The Fund shall consist of any amounts 
     deposited in the Fund under this Act.
       (b) Funding.--On the first day of the 11th fiscal year that 
     begins after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
     of the Treasury shall, from the General Fund of the Treasury, 
     deposit into the Fund established under subsection (a)--
       (1) $4,789,010; and
       (2) an additional amount that equals the amount of interest 
     that would have accrued on the amount described in paragraph 
     (1) if such amount had been invested in interest-bearing 
     obligations of the United States, or in obligations 
     guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the United 
     States, on the first day of the first fiscal year that begins 
     after the date of enactment of this Act and compounded 
     annually thereafter.
       (c) Investment of Trust Fund.--It shall be the duty of the 
     Secretary of the Treasury to invest such portion of the Fund 
     as is not, in the Secretary of Treasury's judgment, required 
     to meet current withdrawals. Such investments may be made 
     only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States or 
     in obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest 
     by the United States. The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     deposit interest resulting from such investments into the 
     Fund.
       (d) Payment of Interest to Tribe.--
       (1) Withdrawal of interest.--Beginning on the first day of 
     the 11th fiscal year after the date of enactment of this Act 
     and, on the first day of each fiscal year thereafter, the 
     Secretary of the Treasury shall withdraw the aggregate amount 
     of interest deposited into the Fund for that fiscal year and 
     transfer that amount to the Secretary of the Interior for use 
     in accordance with paragraph (2). Each amount so transferred 
     shall be available without fiscal year limitation.
       (2) Payments to santee sioux tribe.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall use 
     the amounts transferred under paragraph (1) only for the 
     purpose of making payments to the Santee Sioux Tribe, as such 
     payments are requested by that Indian tribe pursuant to 
     tribal resolution.
       (B) Limitation.--Payments may be made by the Secretary of 
     the Interior under subparagraph (A) only after the Santee 
     Sioux Tribe has adopted a tribal plan under section 6.
       (C) Use of payments by santee sioux tribe.--The Santee 
     Sioux Tribe shall use the payments made under subparagraph 
     (A) only for carrying out projects and programs under the 
     tribal plan prepared under section 6.
       (e) Transfers and Withdrawals.--Except as provided in 
     subsections (c) and (d)(1), the Secretary of the Treasury may 
     not transfer or withdraw any amount deposited under 
     subsection (b).

     SEC. 6. TRIBAL PLANS.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 24 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the tribal council of each of the 
     Yankton Sioux and Santee Sioux Tribes shall prepare a plan 
     for the use of the payments to the tribe under section 4(d) 
     or 5(d) (referred to in this subsection as a ``tribal 
     plan'').
       (b) Contents of Tribal Plan.--Each tribal plan shall 
     provide for the manner in which the tribe covered under the 
     tribal plan shall expend payments to the tribe under 
     subsection (d) to promote--
       (1) economic development;
       (2) infrastructure development;
       (3) the educational, health, recreational, and social 
     welfare objectives of the tribe and its members; or
       (4) any combination of the activities described in 
     paragraphs (1), (2), and (3).
       (c) Tribal Plan Review and Revision.--
       (1) In general.--Each tribal council referred to in 
     subsection (a) shall make available for review and comment by 
     the members of the tribe a copy of the tribal plan for the 
     Indian tribe before the tribal plan becomes final, in 
     accordance with procedures established by the tribal council.
       (2) Updating of tribal plan.--Each tribal council referred 
     to in subsection (a) may, on an annual basis, revise the 
     tribal plan prepared by that tribal council to update the 
     tribal plan. In revising the tribal plan under this 
     paragraph, the tribal council shall provide the members of 
     the tribe opportunity to review and comment on any proposed 
     revision to the tribal plan.
       (3) Consultation.--In preparing the tribal plan and any 
     revisions to update the plan, each tribal council shall 
     consult with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.
       (4) Audit.--
       (A) In general.--The activities of the tribes in carrying 
     out the tribal plans shall be audited as part of the annual 
     single-agency audit that the tribes are required to prepare 
     pursuant to the Office of Management and Budget circular 
     numbered A-133.
       (B) Determination by auditors.--The auditors that conduct 
     the audit described in subparagraph (A) shall--
       (i) determine whether funds received by each tribe under 
     this section for the period covered by the audits were 
     expended to carry out the respective tribal plans in a manner 
     consistent with this section; and

[[Page S1770]]

       (ii) include in the written findings of the audits the 
     determinations made under clause (i).
       (C) Inclusion of findings with publication of proceedings 
     of tribal council.--A copy of the written findings of the 
     audits described in subparagraph (A) shall be inserted in the 
     published minutes of each tribal council's proceedings for 
     the session at which the audit is presented to the tribal 
     councils.
       (d) Prohibition on Per Capita Payments.--No portion of any 
     payment made under this Act may be distributed to any member 
     of the Yankton Sioux Tribe or the Santee Sioux Tribe of 
     Nebraska on a per capita basis.

     SEC. 7. ELIGIBILITY OF TRIBE FOR CERTAIN PROGRAMS AND 
                   SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--No payment made to the Yankton Sioux Tribe 
     or Santee Sioux Tribe pursuant to this Act shall result in 
     the reduction or denial of any service or program to which, 
     pursuant to Federal law--
       (1) the Yankton Sioux Tribe or Santee Sioux Tribe is 
     otherwise entitled because of the status of the tribe as a 
     federally recognized Indian tribe; or
       (2) any individual who is a member of a tribe under 
     paragraph (1) is entitled because of the status of the 
     individual as a member of the tribe.
       (b) Exemptions From Taxation.--No payment made pursuant to 
     this Act shall be subject to any Federal or State income tax.
       (c) Power Rates.--No payment made pursuant to this Act 
     shall affect Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin power rates.

     SEC. 8. STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION.

       Nothing in this Act may be construed as diminishing or 
     affecting any water right of an Indian tribe, except as 
     specifically provided in another provision of this Act, any 
     treaty right that is in effect on the date of enactment of 
     this Act, any authority of the Secretary of the Interior or 
     the head of any other Federal agency under a law in effect on 
     the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are 
     necessary to carry out this Act, including such sums as may 
     be necessary for the administration of the Yankton Sioux 
     Tribe Development Trust Fund under section 4 and the Santee 
     Sioux Tribe of Nebraska Development Trust Fund under section 
     5.

     SEC. 10. EXTINGUISHMENT OF CLAIMS.

       Upon the deposit of funds under sections 4(b) and 5(b), all 
     monetary claims that the Yankton Sioux Tribe or the Santee 
     Sioux Tribe of Nebraska has or may have against the United 
     States for loss of value or use of land related to lands 
     described in section 2(a)(10) resulting from the Fort Randall 
     and Gavins Point projects of the Pick-Sloan Missouri River 
     Basin program shall be extinguished.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mr. Gramm):
  S. 435. A bill to provide that the annual drug certification 
procedures under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 not apply to 
certain countries with which the United States has bilateral agreements 
and other plans relating to counterdrug activities, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, over the last several years, Congress has 
had no good options when it comes to the certification of major drug 
producing and drug transit countries. This has been most apparent in 
our annual debate over the certification of Mexico's efforts in 
combating illicit drugs.
  Certifying Mexico has been very difficult to do in light of the 
upsetting statistics showing that Mexico is a major point of production 
and transit for drugs entering the United States. I have also been, and 
continue to be, concerned about the influence of powerful drug cartels 
in Mexico. In fact, in 1998, I joined 44 other Senators in voting in 
favor of decertifying Mexico.
  Nevertheless, I join many of my colleagues in the belief that the 
certification process does not work as it was intended. In some cases, 
what we have now is the worst of both worlds. The certification process 
subjects some of our closest allies and trading partners to an annual 
ritual of finger-pointing and humiliation rather than supporting mutual 
efforts to control illicit drugs.
  Today, Senator Gramm and I are reintroducing legislation which we 
hope will lead to a more honest and realistic way of addressing the 
international drug problem. By replacing confrontation with 
cooperation, we are encouraging nations to join the United States in 
fighting drugs while eliminating a process which strains our relations 
with allies such as Mexico.
  Our legislation would exempt from the certification process those 
countries that have a bilateral agreement with the United States. These 
agreements would have to address issues relating to the control of 
illicit drugs--including production, distribution, interdiction, demand 
reduction, border security, and cooperation among law enforcement 
agencies.
  This alternative will give both countries a way to work together for 
real goals with real results. Make no mistake, this will not give 
Mexico or any other country a free pass on fighting illicit drugs. On 
the contrary, our bill encourages the adoption of tough bilateral 
agreements. It specifically spells out issues that must be addressed in 
the agreements.
  We specifically require the adoption of ``timetables and objective 
and measurable standards.'' And we require semi-annual reports 
assessing the progress of both countries under the bilateral agreement. 
If progress is not made, the country returns to the annual 
certification process, which involves the possibility of sanctions.
  This issue is particularly important to those of us from border 
states, which are hit so hard by the traffic in illegal drugs. I look 
forward to working with my colleagues on a bipartisan and comprehensive 
solution.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mr. Chafee, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Durbin, Mr. 
        Schumer, Mr. Reed, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. Corzine):
  S. 436. A bill to amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, 
to require the provision of a child safety lock in connection with the 
transfer of a handgun and provide safety standards for child safety 
locks; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, today I introduce the Child Safety Lock Act 
of 2001, along with Senators Chafee, Durbin, Schumer, Reed, Corzine, 
Boxer and Kerry. Our bipartisan measure will save children's lives by 
reducing the senseless tragedies that result when children get their 
hands on improperly stored and unlocked handguns.
  Each year, teenagers and children are involved in more than 10,000 
accidental shootings in which close to 800 people die. In addition, 
every year 1,300 children use firearms to commit suicide. Safety locks 
can be effective in deterring some of these incidents and in preventing 
others.
  The sad truth is that we are inviting disaster every time an unlocked 
gun is stored but is still easily accessible to children. In fact, guns 
are kept in 43 percent of American households with children. In 23 
percent of the gun households, the guns are kept loaded. And, in one 
out of every eight of those homes the guns are left unlocked.
  That is wrong. It is unacceptable. But these cold statistics do not 
begin to describe in human terms the daily tragedies that could be 
prevented by the use of a safety lock.
  Take, for example, the story of a teenage girl in Milwaukee last year 
who was killed when the gun her boyfriend found accidentally went off, 
shooting her in the chest. A lock certainly would have prevented this 
tragedy. A lock would have also saved both the three-year-old in New 
Orleans who shot himself in the head with his mother's gun two months 
ago or the two-year-old boy who shot himself in the forehead with his 
mother's pistol in Pennsylvania last October. Of course, no one will 
ever forget the story of six-year-old Kayla Rolland in Michigan killed 
last year by a classmate who had brought a gun to school. The stories 
could go on for pages, each more tragic than the last, but the most 
tragic fact of all is that many of them were entirely preventable.
  Our legislation will help address this problem. It is simple, 
effective and straightforward. It requires that a child safety device, 
or trigger lock, be sold with every handgun. These devices vary in 
form, but the most common resemble a padlock that wraps around the gun 
trigger and immobilizes it. Trigger locks are already used by tens of 
thousands of responsible gun owners to protect their firearms from 
unauthorized use, and they can be purchased in virtually any gun store 
for less than ten dollars.
  This year, for the first time, this child safety lock bill includes 
standards for the safety locks, building on the work of Senator Kerry 
on this issue. A recent study by the Consumer Product Safety Commission 
and a recent recall by the safety lock manufacturers conclusively 
demonstrates that child safety locks are not being made

[[Page S1771]]

well enough. A lock that is easily picked or one that breaks apart with 
little force defeats the safety purpose of this bill. We wouldn't use a 
lock that is less than foolproof to guard our most valuable 
possessions. We shouldn't use defective locks to protect what is most 
valuable to us--our children.
  A child safety lock provision passed the Senate by an overwhelming 
vote of 78-20 last session as an amendment during the juvenile justice 
debate. This proposal is as popular with the rest of the country and 
the law enforcement community as it was with the last Senate. Polls 
show that between 75 and 80 percent of the American public, including 
gun owners, favor the mandatory sale of child safety locks with guns. 
When I surveyed almost 500 of Wisconsin's police chiefs and sheriffs 
last summer, approximately 90 percent responded that child safety locks 
should be sold with each gun.
  In addition, according to published reports from last year's 
campaign, President Bush indicated that he supports the idea of 
mandatory child safety locks and would sign a bill that required the 
sale of a child safety lock with all new handguns. Attorney General 
Ashcroft confirmed that the administration supports the mandatory sale 
of child safety locks during his confirmation hearings before the 
Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this year.
  This legislation is necessary to ensure that safety locks are 
provided with all handguns and to keep the pressure on handgun 
manufacturers to put safety first. We already protect children by 
requiring that seat belts be installed in all automobiles and that 
childproof safety caps be provided on medicine bottles. We should be no 
less vigilant when it comes to gun safety.
  I ask unanimous consent that the full 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. 436

       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 ``Child Safety Lock Act of 
     2001''.

     SEC. 2. REQUIREMENT OF CHILD HANDGUN SAFETY LOCKS.

       (a) Definitions.--Section 921(a) of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(35) The term `locking device' means a device or locking 
     mechanism--
       ``(A) that--
       ``(i) if installed on a firearm and secured by means of a 
     key or a mechanically, electronically, or electromechanically 
     operated combination lock, is designed to prevent the firearm 
     from being discharged without first deactivating or removing 
     the device by means of a key or mechanically, electronically, 
     or electromechanically operated combination lock;
       ``(ii) if incorporated into the design of a firearm, is 
     designed to prevent discharge of the firearm by any person 
     who does not have access to the key or other device designed 
     to unlock the mechanism and thereby allow discharge of the 
     firearm; or
       ``(iii) is a safe, gun safe, gun case, lock box, or other 
     device that is designed to store a firearm and that is 
     designed to be unlocked only by means of a key, a 
     combination, or other similar means; and
       ``(B) that is approved by a licensed firearms manufacturer 
     for use on the handgun with which the device or locking 
     mechanism is sold, delivered, or transferred.''.
       (b) Unlawful Acts.--
       (1) In general.--Section 922 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after subsection (y) the 
     following:
       ``(z) Locking Devices.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), it 
     shall be unlawful for any licensed manufacturer, licensed 
     importer, or licensed dealer to sell, deliver, or transfer 
     any handgun to any person other than a licensed manufacturer, 
     licensed importer, or licensed dealer, unless the transferee 
     is provided with a locking device for that handgun.
       ``(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) does not apply to--
       ``(A) the--
       ``(i) manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by, the 
     United States or a State or a department or agency of the 
     United States, or a State or a department, agency, or 
     political subdivision of a State, of a firearm; or
       ``(ii) transfer to, or possession by, a law enforcement 
     officer employed by an entity referred to in clause (i) of a 
     firearm for law enforcement purposes (whether on or off 
     duty); or
       ``(B) the transfer to, or possession by, a rail police 
     officer employed by a rail carrier and certified or 
     commissioned as a police officer under the laws of a State of 
     a firearm for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off 
     duty).''.
       (2) Effective date.--Section 922(y) of title 18, United 
     States Code, as added by this subsection, shall take effect 
     180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (c) Liability; Evidence.--
       (1) Liability.--Nothing in this section shall be construed 
     to--
       (A) create a cause of action against any firearms dealer or 
     any other person for any civil liability; or
       (B) establish any standard of care.
       (2) Evidence.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     evidence regarding compliance or noncompliance with the 
     amendments made by this section shall not be admissible as 
     evidence in any proceeding of any court, agency, board, or 
     other entity, except with respect to an action to enforce 
     this section.
       (3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall 
     be construed to bar a governmental action to impose a penalty 
     under section 924(p) of title 18, United States Code, for a 
     failure to comply with section 922(y) of that title.
       (d) Civil Penalties.--Section 924 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1), by striking ``or (f)'' and 
     inserting ``(f), or (p)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(p) Penalties Relating to Locking Devices.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Suspension or revocation of license; civil 
     penalties.--With respect to each violation of section 
     922(y)(1) by a licensee, the Secretary may, after notice and 
     opportunity for hearing--
       ``(i) suspend or revoke any license issued to the licensee 
     under this chapter; or
       ``(ii) subject the licensee to a civil penalty in an amount 
     equal to not more than $10,000.
       ``(B) Review.--An action of the Secretary under this 
     paragraph may be reviewed only as provided in section 923(f).
       ``(2) Administrative remedies.--The suspension or 
     revocation of a license or the imposition of a civil penalty 
     under paragraph (1) does not preclude any administrative 
     remedy that is otherwise available to the Secretary.''.

     SEC. 3. AMENDMENT OF CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY ACT.

       (a) In General.--The Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 
     2051 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end thereof the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 38. CHILD HANDGUN SAFETY LOCKS.

       ``(a) Establishment of Standard.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Rulemaking required.--Notwithstanding section 
     3(a)(1)(E) of this Act, the Commission shall initiate a 
     rulemaking proceeding under section 553 of title 5, United 
     States Code, within 90 days after the date of enactment of 
     the Child Safety Lock Act of 2001 to establish a consumer 
     product safety standard for locking devices. The Commission 
     may extend the 90-day period for good cause. Notwithstanding 
     any other provision of law, including chapter 5 of title 5, 
     United States Code, the Commission shall promulgate a final 
     consumer product safety standard under this paragraph within 
     12 months after the date on which it initiated the 
     rulemaking. The Commission may extend that 12-month period 
     for good cause. The consumer product safety standard 
     promulgated under this paragraph shall take effect 6 months 
     after the date on which the final standard is promulgated.
       ``(B) Standard requirements.--The standard promulgated 
     under subparagraph (A) shall require locking devices that--
       ``(i) are sufficiently difficult for children to de-
     activate or remove; and
       ``(ii) prevent the discharge of the handgun unless the 
     locking device has been de-activated or removed.
       ``(2) Certain provisions not to apply.--
       ``(A) Provisions of this act.--Sections 7, 9, and 30(d) of 
     this Act do not apply to the rulemaking proceeding under 
     paragraph (1). Section 11 of this Act does not apply to any 
     consumer product safety standard promulgated under paragraph 
     (1).
       ``(B) Chapter 5 of title 5.--Except for section 553, 
     chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code, does not apply to 
     this section.
       ``(C) Chapter 6 of title 5.--Chapter 6 of title 5, United 
     States Code, does not apply to this section.
       ``(D) National environmental policy act.--The National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321) does not 
     apply to this section.
       ``(b) No Effect on State Law.--Notwithstanding section 26 
     of this Act, this section does not annul, alter, impair, 
     affect, or exempt any person subject to the provisions of 
     this section from complying with any provision of the law of 
     any State or any political subdivision thereof, except to the 
     extent that such provisions of State law are inconsistent 
     with any provision of this section, and then only to the 
     extent of the inconsistency. A provision of State law is not 
     inconsistent with this section if such provision affords 
     greater protection to children in respect of handguns than is 
     afforded by this section.
       ``(c) Enforcement.--Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2)(A), 
     the consumer product safety standard promulgated by the 
     Commission under subsection (a) shall be enforced under this 
     Act as if it were a consumer product safety standard 
     described in section 7(a).
       ``(d) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Child.--The term `child' means an individual who has 
     not attained the age of 13 years.

[[Page S1772]]

       ``(2) Locking device.--The term `locking device' has the 
     meaning given that term in clauses (i) and (iii) of section 
     921(a)(35)(A) of title 18, United States Code.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1 of the Consumer 
     Product Safety Act is amended by adding at the end of the 
     table of contents the following:

         ``Sec. 38. Child handgun safety locks.''.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to the Consumer Product Safety Commission 
     $2,000,000 to carry out the provisions of section 38 of the 
     Consumer Product Safety Act, such sums to remain available 
     until expended.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE (for himself, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Murray, and Mr. 
        Grassley):
  S. 437. A bill to revise and extend the Safe and Drug-Free Schools 
and Communities Act of 1994; to the Committee on Health, Education, 
Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. DeWINE. 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. 437

       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 ``Safe and Drug-Free Schools 
     and Communities Reauthorization Act''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION 
                   ACT OF 1965.

       Title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.) is amended to read as follows:

         ``TITLE IV--SAFE AND DRUG-FREE SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES

     ``SEC. 4001. SHORT TITLE.

       ``This part may be cited as the `Safe and Drug-Free Schools 
     and Communities Act of 1994'.

     ``SEC. 4002. FINDINGS.

       ``Congress makes the following findings:
       ``(1) Every student should attend a school in a drug- and 
     violence-free learning environment.
       ``(2) The widespread illegal use of alcohol and drugs among 
     the Nation's secondary school students, and increasingly by 
     students in elementary schools as well, constitutes a grave 
     threat to such students' physical and mental well-being, and 
     significantly impedes the learning process. For example, data 
     show that students who drink tend to receive lower grades and 
     are more likely to miss school because of illness than 
     students who do not drink.
       ``(3) Drug and violence prevention programs are essential 
     components of a comprehensive strategy to promote school 
     safety, youth development, positive school outcomes, and to 
     reduce the demand for and illegal use of alcohol, tobacco and 
     drugs throughout the Nation. Schools, local organizations, 
     parents, students, and communities throughout the Nation have 
     a special responsibility to work together to combat the 
     continuing epidemic of violence and illegal drug use and 
     should measure the success of their programs against clearly 
     defined goals and objectives.
       ``(4) Drug and violence prevention programs are most 
     effective when implemented within a research-based, drug and 
     violence prevention framework of proven effectiveness.
       ``(5) Research clearly shows that community contexts 
     contribute to substance abuse and violence.
       ``(6) Substance abuse and violence are intricately related 
     and must be dealt with in a holistic manner.
       ``(7) Research has documented that parental behavior and 
     environment directly influence a child's inclination to use 
     alcohol, tobacco or drugs.

     ``SEC. 4003. PURPOSE.

       ``The purpose of this part is to support programs that 
     prevent violence in and around schools and prevent the 
     illegal use of alcohol, tobacco, and drugs, involve parents, 
     and are coordinated with related Federal, State, school, and 
     community efforts and resources, through the provision of 
     Federal assistance to--
       ``(1) States for grants to local educational agencies and 
     educational service agencies and consortia of such agencies 
     to establish, operate, and improve local programs of school 
     drug and violence prevention, early intervention, 
     rehabilitation referral, and education in elementary and 
     secondary schools for the development and implementation of 
     policies that set clear and appropriate standards regarding 
     the illegal use of alcohol, tobacco and drugs, and for 
     violent behavior (including intermediate and junior high 
     schools);
       ``(2) States for grants to, and contracts with, community-
     based organizations and other public and private nonprofit 
     agencies and organizations for programs of drug and violence 
     prevention including community mobilization, early 
     intervention, rehabilitation referral, and education;
       ``(3) States for development, training, technical 
     assistance, and coordination activities; and
       ``(4) public and private nonprofit organizations to provide 
     technical assistance, conduct training, demonstrations, and 
     evaluation, and to provide supplementary services and 
     community mobilization activities for the prevention of drug 
     use and violence among students and youth.

     ``SEC. 4004. FUNDING.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated--
       ``(1) $700,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, and such sums as 
     may be necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years, 
     for State grants under part A;
       ``(2) $150,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, and such sums as 
     may be necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years, 
     for national programs under part B; and
       ``(3) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, and such sums as 
     may be necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years, 
     for the National Coordinator Initiative under section 4122.

    ``PART A--STATE GRANTS FOR DRUG AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAMS

     ``SEC. 4111. RESERVATIONS AND ALLOTMENTS.

       ``(a) Reservations.--From the amount made available under 
     section 4004(1) to carry out this part for each fiscal year, 
     the Secretary--
       ``(1) shall reserve 1 percent of such amount for grants 
     under this part to Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, 
     and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, to be 
     allotted in accordance with the Secretary's determination of 
     their respective needs;
       ``(2) shall reserve 1 percent of such amount for the 
     Secretary of the Interior to carry out programs under this 
     part for Indian youth;
       ``(3) may reserve not more than $2,000,000 for the national 
     impact evaluation required by section 4117(a); and
       ``(4) shall reserve 0.2 percent of such amount for programs 
     for Native Hawaiians under section 4118.
       ``(b) State Allotments.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     Secretary shall, for each fiscal year, allocate among the 
     States--
       ``(A) one-half of the remainder not reserved under 
     subsection (a) according to the ratio between the school-aged 
     population of each State and the school-aged population of 
     all the States; and
       ``(B) one-half of such remainder according to the ratio 
     between the amount each State received under section 1124A 
     for the preceding year and the sum of such amounts received 
     by all the States.
       ``(2) Minimum.--For any fiscal year, no State shall be 
     allotted under this subsection an amount that is less than 
     one-half of 1 percent of the total amount allotted to all the 
     States under this subsection.
       ``(3) Reallotment.--The Secretary may reallot any amount of 
     any allotment to a State if the Secretary determines that the 
     State will be unable to use such amount within 2 years of 
     such allotment. Such reallotments shall be made on the same 
     basis as allotments are made under paragraph (1).
       ``(4) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) State.--The term `State' means each of the 50 States, 
     the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto 
     Rico.
       ``(B) Local educational agency.--The term `local 
     educational agency' includes educational service agencies and 
     consortia of such agencies.
       ``(c) Limitation.--Amounts appropriated under section 
     4004(2) for a fiscal year may not be increased above the 
     amounts appropriated under such section for the previous 
     fiscal year unless the amounts appropriated under section 
     4004(1) for the fiscal year involved are at least 10 percent 
     greater that the amounts appropriated under such section 
     4004(1) for the previous fiscal year.

     ``SEC. 4112. STATE APPLICATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--In order to receive an allotment under 
     section 4111 for any fiscal year, a State shall submit to the 
     Secretary, at such time as the Secretary may require, an 
     application that--
       ``(1) contains a comprehensive plan for the use of funds by 
     the State educational agency and the chief executive officer 
     to provide safe, orderly, and drug-free schools and 
     communities;
       ``(2) contains the results of the State's needs assessment 
     for drug and violence prevention programs, which shall be 
     based on the results of on-going State evaluation activities, 
     including data on the incidence and prevalence, age of onset, 
     perception of health risk, and perception of social 
     disapproval of drug use and violence by youth in schools and 
     communities and the prevalence of risk or protective factors, 
     buffers or assets or other research-based variables in the 
     school and community;
       ``(3) contains assurances that the sections of the 
     application concerning the funds provided to the chief 
     executive officer and the State educational agency were 
     developed together, with each such officer or State 
     representative, in consultation and coordination with 
     appropriate State officials and others, including the chief 
     State school officer, the chief executive officer, the head 
     of the State alcohol and drug abuse agency, the heads of the 
     State health and mental health agencies, the head of the 
     State criminal justice planning agency, the head of the State 
     child welfare agency, the head of the State board of 
     education, or their designees, and representatives of 
     parents, students, and community-based organizations;

[[Page S1773]]

       ``(4) contains an assurance that the State will cooperate 
     with, and assist, the Secretary in conducting a national 
     impact evaluation of programs required by section 4117(a);
       ``(5) contains assurances that the State education agency 
     and the Governor will develop their respective applications 
     in consultation with an advisory council that includes, to 
     the extent practicable, representatives from school 
     districts, businesses, parents, youth, teachers, 
     administrators, pupil services personnel, private schools, 
     appropriate State agencies, community-based organization, the 
     medical profession, law enforcement, the faith-based 
     community and other groups with interest and expertise in 
     alcohol, tobacco, drug, and violence prevention;
       ``(6) contains assurances that the State education agency 
     and the Governor involve the representatives described in 
     paragraph (5), on an ongoing basis, to review program 
     evaluations and other relevant material and make 
     recommendations to the State education agency and the 
     Governor on how to improve their respective alcohol, tobacco, 
     drug, and violence prevention programs;
       ``(7) contains a list of the State's results-based 
     performance measures for drug and violence prevention, that 
     shall--
       ``(A) be focused on student behavior and attitudes and be 
     derived from the needs assessment;
       ``(B) include targets and due dates for the attainment of 
     such performance measures; and
       ``(C) include a description of the procedures that the 
     State will use to inform local educational agencies of such 
     performance measures for assessing and publicly reporting 
     progress toward meeting such measures or revising them as 
     needed; and
       ``(8) includes any other information the Secretary may 
     require.
       ``(b) State Educational Agency Funds.--A State's 
     application under this section shall also contain a 
     comprehensive plan for the use of funds under section 4113(a) 
     by the State educational agency that includes--
       ``(1) a plan for monitoring the implementation of, and 
     providing technical assistance regarding, the drug and 
     violence prevention programs conducted by local educational 
     agencies in accordance with section 4116
       ``(2) a description of how the State educational agency 
     will use funds under section 4113(b), including how the 
     agency will receive input from parents regarding the use of 
     such funds;
       ``(3) a description of how the State educational agency 
     will coordinate such agency's activities under this part with 
     the chief executive officer's drug and violence prevention 
     programs under this part and with the prevention efforts of 
     other State agencies; and
       ``(4) a description of the procedures the State educational 
     agency will use to review applications from and allocate 
     funding to local educational agencies under section 4115 and 
     how such review will receive input from parents.
       ``(c) Governor's Funds.--A State's application under this 
     section shall also contain a comprehensive plan for the use 
     of funds under section 4114(a) by the chief executive officer 
     that includes, with respect to each activity to be carried 
     out by the State--
       ``(1) a description of how the chief executive officer will 
     coordinate such officer's activities under this part with the 
     State educational agency and other State agencies and 
     organizations involved with drug and violence prevention 
     efforts;
       ``(2) a description of how funds reserved under section 
     4114(a) will be used so as not to duplicate the efforts of 
     the State educational agency and local educational agencies 
     with regard to the provision of school-based prevention 
     efforts and services and how those funds will be used to 
     serve populations not normally served by the State 
     educational agency, such as school dropouts and youth in 
     detention centers;
       ``(3) a description of how the chief executive officer will 
     award funds under section 4114(a) and a plan for monitoring 
     the performance of, and providing technical assistance to, 
     recipients of such funds;
       ``(4) a description of the special outreach activities that 
     will be carried out to maximize the participation of 
     community-based nonprofit organizations of demonstrated 
     effectiveness which provide services in low-income 
     communities;
       ``(5) a description of how funds will be used to support 
     community-wide comprehensive drug and violence prevention 
     planning and community mobilization activities; and
       ``(6) a specific description of how input from parents will 
     be sought regarding the use of funds under section 4114(a).
       ``(d) Peer Review.--The Secretary shall use a peer review 
     process in reviewing State applications under this section.
       ``(e) Interim Application.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provisions of this section, a State may submit for fiscal 
     year 2001 a 1-year interim application and plan for the use 
     of funds under this part that are consistent with the 
     requirements of this section and contain such information as 
     the Secretary may specify in regulations. The purpose of such 
     interim application and plan shall be to afford the State the 
     opportunity to fully develop and review such State's 
     application and comprehensive plan otherwise required by this 
     section. A State may not receive a grant under this part for 
     a fiscal year subsequent to fiscal year 2001 unless the 
     Secretary has approved such State's application and 
     comprehensive plan in accordance with this part.

     ``SEC. 4113. STATE AND LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Use of Funds.--An amount equal to 80 percent of the 
     total amount allocated to a State under section 4111 for each 
     fiscal year shall be used by the State educational agency and 
     its local educational agencies for drug and violence 
     prevention activities in accordance with this section.
       ``(b) State Level Programs.--
       ``(1) In general.--A State educational agency shall use not 
     more than 5 percent of the amount available under subsection 
     (a) for activities such as--
       ``(A) voluntary training and technical assistance 
     concerning drug and violence prevention for local educational 
     agencies and educational service agencies, including 
     teachers, administrators, coaches and athletic directors, 
     other staff, parents, students, community leaders, health 
     service providers, local law enforcement officials, and 
     judicial officials;
       ``(B) the development, identification, dissemination, and 
     evaluation of the most readily available, accurate, and up-
     to-date drug and violence prevention curriculum materials 
     (including videotapes, software, and other technology-based 
     learning resources), for consideration by local educational 
     agencies;
       ``(C) making available to local educational agencies cost 
     effective research-based programs for youth violence and drug 
     abuse prevention;
       ``(D) demonstration projects in drug and violence 
     prevention, including service-learning projects;
       ``(E) training, technical assistance, and demonstration 
     projects to address violence associated with prejudice and 
     intolerance;
       ``(F) financial assistance to enhance resources available 
     for drug and violence prevention in areas serving large 
     numbers of economically disadvantaged children or sparsely 
     populated areas, or to meet other special needs consistent 
     with the purposes of this part; and
       ``(G) the evaluation of activities carried out within the 
     State under this part.
       ``(2) Special rule.--A State educational agency may carry 
     out activities under this subsection directly, or through 
     grants or contracts.
       ``(c) State Administration.--
       ``(1) In general.--A State educational agency may use not 
     more than 5 percent of the amount reserved under subsection 
     (a) for the administrative costs of carrying out its 
     responsibilities under this part.
       ``(2) Uniform management information and reporting 
     system.--In carrying out its responsibilities under this 
     part, a State shall implement a uniform management 
     information and reporting system that includes information on 
     the types of curricula, programs and services provided by the 
     State, Governor, local education agencies, and other 
     recipients of funds under this title.
       ``(d) Local Educational Agency Programs.--
       ``(1) In general.--A State educational agency shall 
     distribute not less than 91 percent of the amount made 
     available under subsection (a) for each fiscal year to local 
     educational agencies in accordance with this subsection.
       ``(2) Distribution.--A State educational agency shall 
     distribute amounts under paragraph (1) in accordance with any 
     one of the following subparagraphs:
       ``(A) Enrollment and combination approach.--Of the amount 
     distributed under paragraph (1), a State educational agency 
     shall distribute
       ``(i) at least 70 percent of such amount to local 
     educational agencies, based on the relative enrollments in 
     public and private nonprofit elementary and secondary schools 
     within the boundaries of such agencies; and
       ``(ii) not to exceed 30 percent of any amounts remaining 
     after amounts are distributed under clause (i)--

       ``(I) to each local educational agency in an amount 
     determined appropriate by the State education agency; or
       ``(II) to local educational agencies that the State 
     education agency determines have the greatest need for 
     additional funds to carry out drug and violence prevention 
     programs authorized by this part.

       ``(B) Competitive and need approach.--Of the amount 
     distributed under paragraph (1), a State educational agency 
     shall distribute
       ``(i) not to exceed 70 percent of such amount to local 
     educational agencies that the State agency determines, 
     through a competitive process, have the greatest need for 
     funds to carry out drug and violence prevention programs 
     based on criteria established by the State agency and 
     authorized under this part; and
       ``(ii) at least 30 percent of any amounts remaining after 
     amounts are distributed under clause (i) to local education 
     agencies that the State agency determines have a need for 
     additional funds to carry out the program authorized under 
     this part.
       ``(3) Consideration of objective data.--For purposes of 
     paragraph (2), in determining which local educational 
     agencies have the greatest need for funds, the State 
     educational agency shall consider objective data which may 
     include--
       ``(A) high or increasing rates of alcohol or drug use among 
     youth;
       ``(B) high or increasing rates of victimization of youth by 
     violence and crime;

[[Page S1774]]

       ``(C) high or increasing rates of arrests and convictions 
     of youth for violent or drug- or alcohol-related crime;
       ``(D) the extent of illegal gang activity;
       ``(E) high or increasing incidence of violence associated 
     with prejudice and intolerance;
       ``(F) high or increasing rates of referrals of youths to 
     drug and alcohol abuse treatment and rehabilitation programs;
       ``(G) high or increasing rates of referrals of youths to 
     juvenile court;
       ``(H) high or increasing rates of expulsions and 
     suspensions of students from schools;
       ``(I) high or increasing rates of reported cases of child 
     abuse and domestic violence; and
       ``(J) high or increasing rates of drug related emergencies 
     or deaths.
       ``(e) Reallocation of Funds.--If a local educational agency 
     chooses not to apply to receive the amount allocated to such 
     agency under subsection (d), or if such agency's application 
     under section 4115 is disapproved by the State educational 
     agency, the State educational agency shall reallocate such 
     amount to one or more of its other local educational 
     agencies.
       ``(f) Return of Funds to State Educational Agency; 
     Reallocation.--
       ``(1) Return.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), upon 
     the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on the date 
     that a local educational agency or educational service agency 
     under this title receives its allocation under this title--
       ``(A) such agency shall return to the State educational 
     agency any funds from such allocation that remain 
     unobligated; and
       ``(B) the State educational agency shall reallocate any 
     such amount to local educational agencies or educational 
     service agencies that have plans for using such amount for 
     programs or activities on a timely basis.
       ``(2) Reallocation.--In any fiscal year, a local 
     educational agency, may retain for obligation in the 
     succeeding fiscal year--
       ``(A) an amount equal to not more than 25 percent of the 
     allocation it receives under this title for such fiscal year; 
     or
       ``(B) upon a demonstration of good cause by such agency or 
     consortium, a greater amount approved by the State 
     educational agency.

     ``SEC. 4114. GOVERNOR'S PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--An amount equal to 20 percent of the 
     total amount allocated to a State under section 4111(b)(1) 
     for each fiscal year shall be used by the chief executive 
     officer of such State for drug and violence prevention 
     programs and activities in accordance with this section.
       ``(2) Administrative costs.--A chief executive officer may 
     use not more than 5 percent of the 20 percent described in 
     paragraph (1) for the administrative costs incurred in 
     carrying out the duties of such officer under this section. 
     The chief executive officer of a State may use amounts under 
     this paragraph to award grants to State, county, or local law 
     enforcement agencies, including district attorneys, in 
     consultation with local education agencies or community-based 
     agencies, for the purposes of carrying out drug abuse and 
     violence prevention activities.
       ``(b) State Plan.--Amounts shall be used under this section 
     in accordance with a State plan submitted by the chief 
     executive office of the State. Such State plan shall 
     contain--
       ``(1) an objective analysis of the current use (and 
     consequences of such use) of alcohol, tobacco, and 
     controlled, illegal, addictive or harmful substances as well 
     as the violence, safety, and discipline problems among 
     students who attend schools in the State (including private 
     school students who participate in the States's drug and 
     violence prevention programs) that is based on ongoing local 
     assessment or evaluation activities;
       ``(2) an analysis, based on data reasonably available at 
     the time, of the prevalence of risk or protective factors, 
     buffers or assets or other research-based variables in 
     schools and communities in the State;
       ``(3) a description of the research-based strategies and 
     programs, which shall be used to prevent or reduce drug use, 
     violence, or disruptive behavior, which shall include--
       ``(A) a specification of the objectively measurable goals, 
     objectives, and activities for the program;
       ``(B) a specification for how risk factors, if any, which 
     have been identified will be targeted through research-based 
     programs; and
       ``(C) a specification for how protective factors, buffers, 
     or assets, if any, will be targeted through research-based 
     programs;
       ``(4) a specification for the method or methods by which 
     measurements of program goals will be achieved; and
       ``(5) a specification for how the evaluation of the 
     effectiveness of the prevention program will be assessed and 
     how the results will be used to refine, improve, and 
     strengthen the program.
       ``(c) Programs Authorized.--
       ``(1) In general.--A chief executive officer shall use 
     funds made available under subsection (a)(1) directly for 
     grants to or contracts with parent groups, schools, community 
     action and job training agencies, community-based 
     organizations, community anti-drug coalitions, law 
     enforcement education partnerships, and other public entities 
     and private nonprofit organizations and consortia thereof. In 
     making such grants and contracts, a chief executive officer 
     shall give priority to programs and activities described in 
     subsection (d) for--
       ``(A) children and youth who are not normally served by 
     State or local educational agencies; or
       ``(B) populations that need special services or additional 
     resources (such as preschoolers, youth in juvenile detention 
     facilities, runaway or homeless children and youth, pregnant 
     and parenting teenagers, and school dropouts).
       ``(2) Peer review.--Grants or contracts awarded under this 
     subsection shall be subject to a peer review process.
       ``(d) Authorized Activities.--Grants and contracts under 
     subsection (c) shall be used to carry out the comprehensive 
     State plan as required under section 4112(a)(1) through 
     programs and activities such as--
       ``(1) disseminating information about drug and violence 
     prevention;
       ``(2) the voluntary training of parents, law enforcement 
     officials, judicial officials, social service providers, 
     health service providers and community leaders about drug and 
     violence prevention, health education (as it relates to drug 
     and violence prevention), early intervention, pupil services, 
     or rehabilitation referral;
       ``(3) developing and implementing comprehensive, community-
     based drug and violence prevention programs that link 
     community resources with schools and integrate services 
     involving education, vocational and job skills training and 
     placement, law enforcement, health, mental health, community 
     service, service-learning, mentoring, and other appropriate 
     services;
       ``(4) planning and implementing drug and violence 
     prevention activities that coordinate the efforts of State 
     agencies with efforts of the State educational agency and its 
     local educational agencies;
       ``(5) activities to protect students traveling to and from 
     school;
       ``(6) before-and-after school recreational, instructional, 
     cultural, and artistic programs that encourage drug- and 
     violence-free lifestyles;
       ``(7) activities that promote the awareness of and 
     sensitivity to alternatives to violence through courses of 
     study that include related issues of intolerance and hatred 
     in history;
       ``(8) developing and implementing activities to prevent and 
     reduce violence associated with prejudice and intolerance;
       ``(9) developing and implementing strategies to prevent 
     illegal gang activity;
       ``(10) coordinating and conducting school and community-
     wide violence and safety and drug abuse assessments and 
     surveys;
       ``(11) service-learning projects that encourage drug- and 
     violence-free lifestyles;
       ``(12) evaluating programs and activities assisted under 
     this section;
       ``(13) developing and implementing community mobilization 
     activities to undertake environmental change strategies 
     related to substance abuse and violence; and
       ``(14) partnerships between local law enforcement agencies, 
     including district attorneys, and local education agencies or 
     community-based agencies.

     ``SEC. 4115. LOCAL APPLICATIONS.

       ``(a) Application Required.--
       ``(1) In general.--In order to be eligible to receive a 
     distribution under section 4113(d) for any fiscal year, a 
     local educational agency shall submit, at such time as the 
     State educational agency requires, an application to the 
     State educational agency for approval. Such an application 
     shall be amended, as necessary, to reflect changes in the 
     local educational agency's program.
       ``(2) Development.--
       ``(A) Consultation.--A local educational agency shall 
     develop its application under subsection (a)(1) in 
     consultation with a local or substate regional advisory 
     council that includes, to the extent possible, 
     representatives of local government, business, parents, 
     students, teachers, pupil services personnel, appropriate 
     State agencies, private schools, the medical profession, law 
     enforcement, community-based organizations, and other groups 
     with interest and expertise in drug and violence prevention.
       ``(B) Duties of advisory council.--In addition to assisting 
     the local educational agency to develop an application under 
     this section, the advisory council established or designated 
     under subparagraph (A) shall, on an ongoing basis--
       ``(i) disseminate information about research-based drug and 
     violence prevention programs, projects, and activities 
     conducted within the boundaries of the local educational 
     agency;
       ``(ii) advise the local educational agency regarding how 
     best to coordinate such agency's activities under this part 
     with other related programs, projects, and activities;
       ``(iii) ensure that a mechanism is in place to enable local 
     educational agencies to have access to up-to-date information 
     concerning the agencies that administer related programs, 
     projects, and activities and any changes in the law that 
     alter the duties of the local educational agencies with 
     respect to activities conducted under this part; and
       ``(iv) review program evaluations and other relevant 
     material and make recommendations on an active and ongoing 
     basis to the local educational agency on how to improve such 
     agency's drug and violence prevention programs.
       ``(b) Contents of Applications.--An application under this 
     section shall contain--
       ``(1) an objective analysis of the current use (and 
     consequences of such use) of alcohol, tobacco, and 
     controlled, illegal, addictive or harmful substances as well 
     as the violence, safety, and discipline problems among

[[Page S1775]]

     students who attend the schools of the applicant (including 
     private school students who participate in the applicant's 
     drug and violence prevention program) that is based on 
     ongoing local assessment or evaluation activities;
       ``(2) an analysis, based on data reasonably available at 
     the time, of the prevalence of risk or protective factors, 
     buffers or assets or other research-based variables in the 
     school and community;
       ``(3) a description of the research-based strategies and 
     programs, which shall be used to prevent or reduce drug use, 
     violence, or disruptive behavior, which shall include--
       ``(A) a specification of the objectively measurable goals, 
     objectives, and activities for the program, which shall 
     include--
       ``(i) reductions in the use of alcohol, tobacco, and 
     illicit drugs and violence by youth;
       ``(ii) specific reductions in the prevalence of identified 
     risk factors;
       ``(iii) specific increases in the prevalence of protective 
     factors, buffers, or assets if any have been identified; or
       ``(iv) other research-based goals, objectives, and 
     activities that are identified as part of the application 
     that are not otherwise covered under clauses (i) through 
     (iii);
       ``(B) a specification for how risk factors, if any, which 
     have been identified will be targeted through research-based 
     programs; and
       ``(C) a specification for how protective factors, buffers, 
     or assets, if any, will be targeted through research-based 
     programs;
       ``(4) a specification for the method or methods by which 
     measurements of program goals will be achieved;
       ``(5) a specification for how the evaluation of the 
     effectiveness of the prevention program will be assessed and 
     how the results will be used to refine, improve, and 
     strengthen the program;
       ``(6) an assurance that the applicant has, or the schools 
     to be served have, a plan for keeping schools safe and drug-
     free that includes--
       ``(A) appropriate and effective discipline policies that 
     prohibit disorderly conduct, the possession of firearms and 
     other weapons, and the illegal use, possession, distribution, 
     and sale of tobacco, alcohol, and other drugs by students;
       ``(B) security procedures at school and while students are 
     on the way to and from school;
       ``(C) prevention activities that are designed to create and 
     maintain safe, disciplined, and drug-free environments; and
       ``(D) a crisis management plan for responding to violent or 
     traumatic incidents on school grounds; and
       ``(7) such other information and assurances as the State 
     educational agency may reasonably require.
       ``(c) Review of Application.--
       ``(1) In general.--In reviewing local applications under 
     this section, a State educational agency shall use a peer 
     review process or other methods of assuring the quality of 
     such applications.
       ``(2) Considerations.--
       ``(A) In general.--In determining whether to approve the 
     application of a local educational agency under this section, 
     a State educational agency shall consider the quality of the 
     local educational agency's comprehensive plan under 
     subsection (b)(6) and the extent to which the proposed 
     plan provides a thorough assessment of the substance abuse 
     and violence problem, uses objective data and the 
     knowledge of a wide range of community members, develops 
     measurable goals and objectives, and implements research-
     based programs that have been shown to be effective and 
     meet identified needs.
       ``(B) Disapproval.--A State educational agency may 
     disapprove a local educational agency application under this 
     section in whole or in part and may withhold, limit, or place 
     restrictions on the use of funds allotted to such a local 
     educational agency in a manner the State educational agency 
     determines will best promote the purposes of this part, 
     except that a local educational agency shall be afforded an 
     opportunity to appeal any such disapproval.

     ``SEC. 4116. LOCAL DRUG AND VIOLENCE PREVENTION PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Program Requirements.--A local educational agency 
     shall use funds received under this part to adopt and carry 
     out a comprehensive drug and violence prevention program 
     which shall--
       ``(1) be designed, for all students and school employees, 
     to--
       ``(A) prevent the use, possession, and distribution of 
     tobacco, alcohol, and illegal drugs by students and to 
     prevent the illegal use, possession, and distribution of such 
     substances by school employees;
       ``(B) prevent violence and promote school safety; and
       ``(C) create a disciplined environment conducive to 
     learning;
       ``(2) include activities to promote the involvement of 
     parents and coordination with community groups and agencies, 
     including the distribution of information about the local 
     educational agency's needs, goals, and programs under this 
     part;
       ``(3) implement activities which shall only include--
       ``(A) a thorough assessment of the substance abuse violence 
     problem, using objective data and the knowledge of a wide 
     range of community members;
       ``(B) the development of measurable goals and objectives;
       ``(C) the implementation of research-based programs that 
     have been shown to be effective and meet identified goals; 
     and
       ``(D) an evaluation of program activities; and
       ``(4) implement prevention programming activities within 
     the context of a research-based prevention framework.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--A comprehensive, age-appropriate, 
     developmentally-, and research-based drug and violence 
     prevention program carried out under this part may include--
       ``(1) drug or violence prevention and education programs 
     for all students, from the preschool level through grade 12, 
     that address the legal, social, personal and health 
     consequences of the use of illegal drugs or violence, promote 
     a sense of individual responsibility, and provide information 
     about effective techniques for resisting peer pressure to use 
     illegal drugs;
       ``(2) programs of drug or violence prevention, health 
     education (as it relates to drug and violence prevention), 
     early intervention, pupil services, mentoring, or 
     rehabilitation referral, which emphasize students' sense of 
     individual responsibility and which may include--
       ``(A) the dissemination of information about drug or 
     violence prevention;
       ``(B) the professional development or voluntary training of 
     school personnel, parents, students, law enforcement 
     officials, judicial officials, health service providers and 
     community leaders in prevention, education, early 
     intervention, pupil services or rehabilitation referral; and
       ``(C) the implementation of strategies, including 
     strategies to integrate the delivery of services from a 
     variety of providers, to combat illegal alcohol, tobacco and 
     drug use, such as--
       ``(i) family counseling; and
       ``(ii) activities, such as community service and service-
     learning projects, that are designed to increase students' 
     sense of community;
       ``(3) age-appropriate, developmentally based violence 
     prevention and education programs for all students, from the 
     preschool level through grade 12, that address the legal, 
     health, personal, and social consequences of violent and 
     disruptive behavior, including sexual harassment and abuse, 
     and victimization associated with prejudice and intolerance, 
     and that include activities designed to help students develop 
     a sense of individual responsibility and respect for the 
     rights of others, and to resolve conflicts without violence, 
     or otherwise decrease the prevalence of risk factors or 
     increase the prevalence of protective factors, buffers, or 
     assets in the community;
       ``(4) violence prevention programs for school-aged youth, 
     which emphasize students' sense of individual responsibility 
     and may include--
       ``(A) the dissemination of information about school safety 
     and discipline;
       ``(B) the professional development or voluntary training of 
     school personnel, parents, students, law enforcement 
     officials, judicial officials, and community leaders in 
     designing and implementing strategies to prevent school 
     violence;
       ``(C) the implementation of strategies, such as conflict 
     resolution and peer mediation, student outreach efforts 
     against violence, anti-crime youth councils (which work with 
     school and community-based organizations to discuss and 
     develop crime prevention strategies), and the use of 
     mentoring programs, to combat school violence and other forms 
     of disruptive behavior, such as sexual harassment and abuse; 
     and
       ``(D) the development and implementation of character 
     education programs, as a component of a comprehensive drug or 
     violence prevention program, that are tailored by 
     communities, parents and schools; and
       ``(E) comprehensive, community-wide strategies to prevent 
     or reduce illegal gang activities and drug use;
       ``(5) supporting `safe zones of passage' for students 
     between home and school through such measures as Drug- and 
     Weapon-Free School Zones, enhanced law enforcement, and 
     neighborhood patrols;
       ``(6) the acquisition or hiring of school security 
     equipment, technologies, personnel, or services such as--
       ``(A) metal detectors;
       ``(B) electronic locks;
       ``(C) surveillance cameras; and
       ``(D) other drug and violence prevention-related equipment 
     and technologies;
       ``(7) professional development for teachers and other staff 
     and curricula that promote the awareness of and sensitivity 
     to alternatives to violence through courses of study that 
     include related issues of intolerance and hatred in history;
       ``(8) the promotion of before-and-after school 
     recreational, instructional, cultural, and artistic programs 
     in supervised community settings;
       ``(9) other research-based prevention programming that is--
       ``(A) effective in reducing the prevalence of alcohol, 
     tobacco or drug use, and violence in youth;
       ``(B) effective in reducing the prevalence of risk factors 
     predictive of increased alcohol, tobacco or drug use, and 
     violence; or
       ``(C) effective in increasing the prevalence of protective 
     factors, buffers, and assets predictive of decreased alcohol, 
     tobacco or drug use and violence among youth;
       ``(10) the collection of objective data used to assess 
     program needs, program implementation, or program success in 
     achieving program goals and objectives;

[[Page S1776]]

       ``(11) community involvement activities including community 
     mobilization;
       ``(12) voluntary parental involvement and training;
       ``(13) the evaluation of any of the activities authorized 
     under this subsection;
       ``(14) the provision of mental health counseling (by 
     qualified counselors) to students for drug or violence 
     related problems;
       ``(15) consistent with the fourth amendment to the 
     Constitution of the United States, the testing of a student 
     for illegal drug use or inspecting a student's locker for 
     guns, explosives, other weapons, or illegal drugs, including 
     at the request of or with the consent of a parent or legal 
     guardian of the student, if the local educational agency 
     elects to so test or inspect; and
       ``(16) the conduct of a nationwide background check of each 
     local educational agency employee (regardless of when hired) 
     and prospective employees for the purpose of determining 
     whether the employee or prospective employee has been 
     convicted of a crime that bears upon the employee's or 
     prospective employee's fitness--
       ``(A) to have responsibility for the safety or well-being 
     of children;
       ``(B) to serve in the particular capacity in which the 
     employee or prospective employee is or will be employed; or
       ``(C) to otherwise be employed at all by the local 
     educational agency.
       ``(c) Limitations.--
       ``(1) In general.--Not more than 20 percent of the funds 
     made available to a local educational agency under this part 
     may be used to carry out the activities described in 
     paragraphs (5) and (6) of subsection (b).
       ``(2) Special rule.--A local educational agency shall only 
     be able to use funds received under this part for activities 
     described in paragraphs (5) and (6) of subsection (b) if 
     funding for such activities is not received from other 
     Federal agencies.
       ``(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this section shall 
     be construed to prohibit the use of funds under this part by 
     any local educational agency or school for the establishment 
     or implementation of a school uniform policy so long as such 
     policy is part of the overall comprehensive drug and violence 
     prevention plan of the State involved and is supported by the 
     State's needs assessment and other research-based 
     information.

     ``SEC. 4117. EVALUATION AND REPORTING.

       ``(a) Impact Evaluation.--
       ``(1) Biennial evaluation.--The Secretary, in consultation 
     with the National Advisory Committee, shall conduct an 
     independent biennial evaluation of the impact of programs 
     assisted under this part and of other recent and new 
     initiatives to combat violence in schools. The evaluation 
     shall report on--
       ``(A) whether funded community and local education agency 
     programs--
       ``(i) provided a thorough assessment of the substance abuse 
     and violence problem;
       ``(ii) used objective data and the knowledge of a wide 
     range of community members;
       ``(iii) developed measurable goals and objectives; and
       ``(iv) implemented research-based programs that have been 
     shown to be effective and meet identified needs;
       ``(v) conducted periodic program evaluations to assess 
     progress made towards achieving program goals and objectives 
     and whether they used evaluations to improve program goals, 
     objectives and activities;
       ``(B) whether funded community and local education agency 
     programs have been designed and implemented in a manner that 
     specifically targets, if relevant to the program--
       ``(i) research-based variables that are predictive of drug 
     use or violence;
       ``(ii) risk factors that are predictive of an increased 
     likelihood that young people will use drugs, alcohol or 
     tobacco or engage in violence or drop out of school; or
       ``(iii) protective factors, buffers, or assets that are 
     known to protect children and youth from exposure to risk, 
     either by reducing the exposure to risk factors or by 
     changing the way the young person responds to risk, and to 
     increase the likelihood of positive youth development;
       ``(C) whether funded community and local education agency 
     programs have appreciably reduced the level of drug, alcohol 
     and tobacco use and school violence and the presence of 
     firearms at schools; and
       ``(D) whether funded community and local educational agency 
     programs have conducted effective parent involvement and 
     voluntary training programs.
       ``(2) Data collection.--The National Center for Education 
     Statistics shall collect data to determine the incidence and 
     prevalence of social disapproval of drug use and violence in 
     elementary and secondary schools in the States.
       ``(3) Biennial report.--Not later than January 1, 2003, and 
     every 2 years thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the 
     President and Congress a report on the findings of the 
     evaluation conducted under paragraph (1) together with the 
     data collected under paragraph (2) and data available from 
     other sources on the incidence and prevalence, age of onset, 
     perception of health risk, and perception of social 
     disapproval of drug use in elementary and secondary schools 
     in the States. The Secretary shall include data submitted by 
     the States pursuant to subsection (b)(2)(B).
       ``(b) State Report.--
       ``(1) In general.--By December 1, 2002, and every 2 years 
     thereafter, the chief executive officer of the State, in 
     cooperation with the State educational agency, shall submit 
     to the Secretary a report--
       ``(A) on the implementation and outcomes of State programs 
     under section 4114 and section 4113(b) and local educational 
     agency programs under section 4113(d), as well as an 
     assessment of their effectiveness;
       ``(B) on the State's progress toward attaining its goals 
     for drug and violence prevention under subsections (b)(1) and 
     (c)(1) of section 4112; and
       ``(C) on the State's efforts to inform parents of, and 
     include parents in, violence and drug prevention efforts.
       ``(2) Special rule.--The report required by this subsection 
     shall be--
       ``(A) in the form specified by the Secretary;
       ``(B) based on the State's ongoing evaluation activities, 
     and shall include data on the incidence and prevalence, age 
     of onset, perception of health risk, and perception of social 
     disapproval of drug use and violence by youth in schools and 
     communities; and
       ``(C) made readily available to the public.
       ``(c) Local Educational Agency Report.--
       ``(1) In general.--Each local educational agency receiving 
     funds under this part shall submit to the State educational 
     agency such information that the State requires to complete 
     the State report required by subsection (b), including a 
     description of how parents were informed of, and participated 
     in, violence and drug prevention efforts.
       ``(2) Availability.--Information under paragraph (1) shall 
     be made readily available to the public.
       ``(3) Provision of documentation.--Not later than January 1 
     of each year that a State is required to report under 
     subsection (b), the Secretary shall provide to the State 
     education agency all of the necessary documentation required 
     for compliance with this section.

     ``SEC. 4118. PROGRAMS FOR NATIVE HAWAIIANS.

       ``(a) General Authority.--From the funds made available 
     pursuant to section 4111(a)(4) to carry out this section, the 
     Secretary shall make grants to or enter into cooperative 
     agreements or contracts with organizations primarily serving 
     and representing Native Hawaiians which are recognized by the 
     Governor of the State of Hawaii to plan, conduct, and 
     administer programs, or portions thereof, which are 
     authorized by and consistent with the provisions of this 
     title for the benefit of Native Hawaiians.
       ``(b) Definition of Native Hawaiian.--For the purposes of 
     this section, the term `Native Hawaiian' means any individual 
     any of whose ancestors were natives, prior to 1778, of the 
     area which now comprises the State of Hawaii.

                      ``PART B--NATIONAL PROGRAMS

     ``SEC. 4121. FEDERAL ACTIVITIES.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--From funds made available to 
     carry out this part under section 4004(2), the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     the Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, 
     and the Attorney General, shall carry out programs to prevent 
     the illegal use of drugs and violence among, and promote 
     safety and discipline for, students at all educational levels 
     from preschool through the post-secondary level. The 
     Secretary shall carry out such programs directly, or through 
     grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements with public and 
     private nonprofit organizations and individuals, or through 
     agreements with other Federal agencies, and shall coordinate 
     such programs with other appropriate Federal activities. Such 
     programs may include--
       ``(1) the development and demonstration of innovative 
     strategies for the voluntary training of school personnel, 
     parents, and members of the community, including the 
     demonstration of model preservice training programs for 
     prospective school personnel;
       ``(2) demonstrations and rigorous evaluations of innovative 
     approaches to drug and violence prevention;
       ``(3) the provision of information on drug abuse education 
     and prevention to the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     for dissemination by the clearinghouse for alcohol and drug 
     abuse information established under section 501(d)(16) of the 
     Public Health Service Act;
       ``(4) the development of curricula related to child abuse 
     prevention and education and the training of personnel to 
     teach child abuse education and prevention to elementary and 
     secondary schoolchildren;
       ``(5) program evaluations in accordance with section 10201 
     that address issues not addressed under section 4117(a);
       ``(6) direct services to schools and school systems 
     afflicted with especially severe drug and violence problems 
     or to support crisis situations and appropriate response 
     efforts;
       ``(7) activities in communities designated as empowerment 
     zones or enterprise communities that will connect schools to 
     community-wide efforts to reduce drug and violence problems;
       ``(8) developing and disseminating drug and violence 
     prevention materials, including video-based projects and 
     model curricula;
       ``(9) developing and implementing a comprehensive violence 
     prevention strategy for schools and communities, that may 
     include conflict resolution, peer mediation, the teaching of 
     law and legal concepts, and other activities designed to stop 
     violence;
       ``(10) the implementation of innovative activities, such as 
     community service and service-learning projects, designed to 
     rebuild safe and healthy neighborhoods and increase students' 
     sense of individual responsibility;

[[Page S1777]]

       ``(11) grants to noncommercial telecommunications entities 
     for the production and distribution of national video-based 
     projects that provide young people with models for conflict 
     resolution and responsible decisionmaking;
       ``(12) the development of education and training programs, 
     curricula, instructional materials, and professional training 
     and development for preventing and reducing the incidence of 
     crimes and conflicts motivated by hate in localities most 
     directly affected by hate crimes; and
       ``(13) other activities that meet unmet national needs 
     related to the purposes of this title.
       ``(b) Peer Review.--The Secretary shall use a peer review 
     process in reviewing applications for funds under this 
     section.

     ``SEC. 4122. NATIONAL COORDINATOR PROGRAM.

       ``(a) In General.--From amounts available to carry out this 
     section under section 4004(3), the Secretary shall provide 
     for the establishment of a National Coordinator Program under 
     which the Secretary shall award grants to local education 
     agencies for the hiring of drug prevention and school safety 
     program coordinators.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--Amounts received under a grant under 
     subsection (a) shall be used by local education agencies to 
     recruit, hire, and train individuals to serve as drug 
     prevention and school safety program coordinators in schools 
     with significant drug and school safety problems. Such 
     coordinators shall be responsible for developing, conducting, 
     and analyzing assessments of drug and crime problems at their 
     schools, and administering the safe and drug free grant 
     program at such schools.

     ``SEC. 4123. SAFE AND DRUG FREE SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITIES 
                   ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

       ``(a) Establishment.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is hereby established an advisory 
     committee to be known as the `Safe and Drug Free Schools and 
     Communities Advisory Committee' (referred to in this section 
     as the `Advisory Committee') to--
       ``(A) consult with the Secretary under subsection (b);
       ``(B) coordinate Federal school- and community-based 
     substance abuse and violence prevention programs and reduce 
     duplicative research or services;
       ``(C) develop core data sets and evaluation protocols for 
     safe and drug free school- and community-based programs;
       ``(D) provide technical assistance and training for safe 
     and drug free school- and community-based programs;
       ``(E) provide for the diffusion of research-based safe and 
     drug free school- and community-based programs; and
       ``(F) review other regulations and standards developed 
     under this title.
       ``(2) Composition.--The Advisory Committee shall be 
     composed of representatives from--
       ``(A) the Department of Education,
       ``(B) the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
       ``(C) the National Institute on Drug Abuse;
       ``(D) the National Institute on Alcoholism and Alcohol 
     Abuse;
       ``(E) the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention;
       ``(F) the Center for Mental Health Services;
       ``(G) the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency 
     Prevention;
       ``(H) the Office of National Drug Control Policy; and
       ``(I) State and local governments, including education 
     agencies.
       ``(3) Consultation.--In carrying out its duties under this 
     section, the Advisory Committee shall annually consult with 
     interested State and local coordinators of school- and 
     community-based substance abuse and violence prevention 
     programs and other interested groups.
       ``(b) Programs.--
       ``(1) In general.--From amounts made available under 
     section 4004(2) to carry out this part, the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Advisory Committee, shall carry out 
     research-based programs to strengthen the accountability and 
     effectiveness of the State, Governor's, and national programs 
     under this title.
       ``(2) Grants, contracts or cooperative agreements.--The 
     Secretary shall carry out paragraph (1) directly or through 
     grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements with public and 
     nonprofit private organizations and individuals or through 
     agreements with other Federal agencies.
       ``(3) Coordination.--The Secretary shall coordinate 
     programs under this section with other appropriate Federal 
     activities.
       ``(4) Activities.--Activities that may be carried out under 
     programs funded under this section may include--
       ``(A) the provision of technical assistance and training, 
     in collaboration with other Federal agencies utilizing their 
     expertise and national and regional training systems, for 
     Governors, State education agencies and local education 
     agencies to support high quality, effective programs that--
       ``(i) provide a thorough assessment of the substance abuse 
     and violence problem;
       ``(ii) utilize objective data and the knowledge of a wide 
     range of community members;
       ``(iii) develop measurable goals and objectives; and
       ``(iv) implement research-based activities that have been 
     shown to be effective and that meet identified needs;
       ``(B) the provision of technical assistance and training to 
     foster program accountability;
       ``(C) the diffusion and dissemination of best practices and 
     programs;
       ``(D) the development of core data sets and evaluation 
     tools;
       ``(E) program evaluations;
       ``(F) the provision of information on drug abuse education 
     and prevention to the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     for dissemination by the Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug 
     Abuse Information established under section 501(d)(16) of the 
     Public Health Service Act; and
       ``(G) other activities that meet unmet needs related to the 
     purposes of this title and that are undertaken in 
     consultation with the Advisory Committee.

     ``SEC. 4124. HATE CRIME PREVENTION.

       ``(a) Grant Authorization.--From funds made available to 
     carry out this part under section 4004(2) the Secretary may 
     make grants to local educational agencies and community-based 
     organizations for the purpose of providing assistance to 
     localities most directly affected by hate crimes.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--
       ``(1) Program development.--Grants under this section may 
     be used to improve elementary and secondary educational 
     efforts, including--
       ``(A) development of education and training programs 
     designed to prevent and to reduce the incidence of crimes and 
     conflicts motivated by hate;
       ``(B) development of curricula for the purpose of improving 
     conflict or dispute resolution skills of students, teachers, 
     and administrators;
       ``(C) development and acquisition of equipment and 
     instructional materials to meet the needs of, or otherwise be 
     part of, hate crime or conflict programs; and
       ``(D) professional training and development for teachers 
     and administrators on the causes, effects, and resolutions of 
     hate crimes or hate-based conflicts.
       ``(2) In general.--In order to be eligible to receive a 
     grant under this section for any fiscal year, a local 
     educational agency, or a local educational agency in 
     conjunction with a community-based organization, shall submit 
     an application to the Secretary in such form and containing 
     such information as the office may reasonably require.
       ``(3) Requirements.--Each application under paragraph (2) 
     shall include--
       ``(A) a request for funds for the purposes described in 
     this section;
       ``(B) a description of the schools and communities to be 
     served by the grants; and
       ``(C) assurances that Federal funds received under this 
     section shall be used to supplement, not supplant, non-
     Federal funds.
       ``(4) Comprehensive plan.--Each application shall include a 
     comprehensive plan that contains--
       ``(A) a description of the hate crime or conflict problems 
     within the schools or the community targeted for assistance;
       ``(B) a description of the program to be developed or 
     augmented by such Federal and matching funds;
       ``(C) assurances that such program or activity shall be 
     administered by or under the supervision of the applicant;
       ``(D) proper and efficient administration of such program; 
     and
       ``(E) fiscal control and fund accounting procedures as may 
     be necessary to ensure prudent use, proper disbursement, and 
     accurate accounting of funds received under this section.
       ``(c) Award of Grants.--
       ``(1) Selection of recipients.--The Secretary shall 
     consider the incidence of crimes and conflicts motivated by 
     bias in the targeted schools and communities in awarding 
     grants under this section.
       ``(2) Geographic distribution.--The Secretary shall 
     attempt, to the extent practicable, to achieve an equitable 
     geographic distribution of grant awards.
       ``(3) Dissemination of information.--The Secretary shall 
     attempt, to the extent practicable, to make available 
     information regarding successful hate crime prevention 
     programs, including programs established or expanded with 
     grants under this section.
       ``(d) Reports.--The Secretary shall submit to the Congress 
     a report every two years which shall contain a detailed 
     statement regarding grants and awards, activities of grant 
     recipients, and an evaluation of programs established under 
     this section.

                      ``PART C--GENERAL PROVISIONS

     ``SEC. 4131. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this part:
       ``(1) Community-based organization.--The term `community-
     based organization' means a private nonprofit organization 
     which is representative of a community or significant 
     segments of a community and which provides educational or 
     related services to individuals in the community.
       ``(2) Drug and violence prevention.--The term `drug and 
     violence prevention' means--
       ``(A) with respect to drugs, prevention, early 
     intervention, rehabilitation referral, or education related 
     to the illegal use of alcohol and the use of controlled, 
     illegal, addictive, or harmful substances, including 
     inhalants and anabolic steroids;
       ``(B) prevention, early intervention, smoking cessation 
     activities, or education, related to the use of tobacco by 
     children and youth eligible for services under this title; 
     and
       ``(C) with respect to violence, the promotion of school 
     safety, such that students

[[Page S1778]]

     and school personnel are free from violent and disruptive 
     acts, including sexual harassment and abuse, and 
     victimization associated with prejudice and intolerance, on 
     school premises, going to and from school, and at school-
     sponsored activities, through the creation and maintenance of 
     a school environment that is free of weapons and fosters 
     individual responsibility and respect for the rights of 
     others.
       ``(3) Hate crime.--The term `hate crime' means a crime as 
     described in section 1(b) of the Hate Crime Statistics Act of 
     1990.
       ``(4) Nonprofit.--The term `nonprofit', as applied to a 
     school, agency, organization, or institution means a school, 
     agency, organization, or institution owned and operated by 
     one or more nonprofit corporations or associations, no part 
     of the net earnings of which inures, or may lawfully inure, 
     to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual.
       ``(5) Objectively measurable goals.--The term `objectively 
     measurable goals' means prevention programming goals defined 
     through use of quantitative epidemiological data measuring 
     the prevalence of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug use, 
     violence, and the prevalence of risk and protective factors 
     predictive of these behaviors, collected through a variety of 
     methods and sources known to provide high quality data.
       ``(6) Protective factor, buffer, or asset.--The terms 
     `protective factor', `buffer', and `asset' mean any one of a 
     number of the community, school, family, or peer-individual 
     domains that are known, through prospective, longitudinal 
     research efforts, or which are grounded in a well-established 
     theoretical model of prevention, and have been shown to 
     prevent alcohol, tobacco, or illicit drug use, as well as 
     violent behavior, by youth in the community, and which 
     promote positive youth development.
       ``(7) Risk factor.--The term `risk factor' means any one of 
     a number of characteristics of the community, school, family, 
     or peer-individual domains that are known, through 
     prospective, longitudinal research efforts, to be predictive 
     of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use, as well as violent 
     behavior, by youth in the school and community.
       ``(8) School-aged population.--The term `school-aged 
     population' means the population aged five through 17, as 
     determined by the Secretary on the basis of the most recent 
     satisfactory data available from the Department of Commerce.
       ``(9) School personnel.--The term `school personnel' 
     includes teachers, administrators, counselors, social 
     workers, psychologists, nurses, librarians, and other support 
     staff who are employed by a school or who perform services 
     for the school on a contractual basis.

     ``SEC. 4132. MATERIALS.

       ``(a) `Illegal and Harmful' Message.--Drug prevention 
     programs supported under this part shall convey a clear and 
     consistent message that the illegal use of alcohol and other 
     drugs is illegal and harmful.
       ``(b) Curriculum.--The Secretary shall not prescribe the 
     use of specific curricula for programs supported under this 
     part, but may evaluate the effectiveness of such curricula 
     and other strategies in drug and violence prevention.

     ``SEC. 4133. PROHIBITED USES OF FUNDS.

       ``No funds under this part may be used for--
       ``(1) construction (except for minor remodeling needed to 
     accomplish the purposes of this part); and
       ``(2) medical services, drug treatment or rehabilitation, 
     except for pupil services or referral to treatment for 
     students who are victims of or witnesses to crime or who use 
     alcohol, tobacco, or drugs.

     ``SEC. 4134. QUALITY RATING.

       ``(a) In General.--The chief executive officer of each 
     State, or in the case of a State in which the constitution or 
     law of such State designates another individual, entity, or 
     agency in the State to be responsible for education 
     activities, such individual, entity, or agency, is authorized 
     and encouraged--
       ``(1) to establish a standard of quality for drug, alcohol, 
     and tobacco prevention programs implemented in public 
     elementary schools and secondary schools in the State in 
     accordance with subsection (b); and
       ``(2) to identify and designate, upon application by a 
     public elementary school or secondary school, any such school 
     that achieves such standard as a quality program school.
       ``(b) Criteria.--The standard referred to in subsection (a) 
     shall address, at a minimum--
       ``(1) a comparison of the rate of illegal use of drugs, 
     alcohol, and tobacco by students enrolled in the school for a 
     period of time to be determined by the chief executive 
     officer of the State;
       ``(2) the rate of suspensions or expulsions of students 
     enrolled in the school for drug, alcohol, or tobacco-related 
     offenses;
       ``(3) the effectiveness of the drug, alcohol, or tobacco 
     prevention program as proven by research;
       ``(4) the involvement of parents and community members in 
     the design of the drug, alcohol, and tobacco prevention 
     program; and
       ``(5) the extent of review of existing community drug, 
     alcohol, and tobacco prevention programs before 
     implementation of the public school program.
       ``(c) Request for Quality Program School Designation.--A 
     school that wishes to receive a quality program school 
     designation shall submit a request and documentation of 
     compliance with this section to the chief executive officer 
     of the State or the individual, entity, or agency described 
     in subsection (a), as the case may be.
       ``(d) Public Notification.--Not less than once a year, the 
     chief executive officer of each State or the individual, 
     entity, or agency described in subsection (a), as the case 
     may be, shall make available to the public a list of the 
     names of each public school in the State that has received a 
     quality program school designation in accordance with this 
     section.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DeWINE:
  S. 438. A bill to improve the quality of teachers in elementary and 
secondary schools; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. DeWINE. 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. 438

       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 ``Teacher Quality Act of 
     2001''.

         TITLE I--EISENHOWER NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE IMPROVEMENT

     SEC. 101. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The most important education tool in any classroom is a 
     qualified, highly trained teacher.
       (2) The collection and effective dissemination of best 
     practices in education is a primary responsibility of the 
     Federal Government.
       (3) The Eisenhower National Clearinghouse is the Nation's 
     repository of kindergarten through grade 12 instructional 
     materials in mathematics and science education, and 
     disseminates information about these materials in a user-
     friendly format for educators.
       (4) The Eisenhower National Clearinghouse collaborates with 
     the national network of Eisenhower Regional Mathematics and 
     Science Education Consortia and the collaboration includes 
     twelve demonstration sites throughout the Nation.
       (5) Since 1992, the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse has 
     distributed 3,714,807 CD-ROM's and print publications. 
     Products are distributed to every school building in the 
     Nation, colleges of education, and various education groups 
     and professional organizations. The Eisenhower National 
     Clearinghouse has received over 40,000,000 hits to their web 
     site since the creation of the web site in 1994. In addition, 
     the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse has established over 
     100 access centers across the Nation to expand direct service 
     to more teachers.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this title is--
       (1) to expand the activities of the Eisenhower National 
     Clearinghouse to include collecting and reviewing 
     instructional and professional development materials and 
     programs for language arts and social studies; and
       (2) to require the Eisenhower National Clearinghouse to 
     collect and analyze the materials and programs.

     SEC. 102. EXPANDED ACTIVITIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 2102 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6622(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(2), by striking ``for Mathematics and 
     Science'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and science'' each 
     place the term appears and inserting ``, science, language 
     arts, and social studies'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and science'' and 
     inserting ``, science, language arts, and social studies'';
       (iii) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``and science'' and 
     inserting ``, science, language arts, and social studies''; 
     and
       (iv) by amending subparagraph (F) to read as follows:
       ``(F) gather (in consultation with the Department, national 
     teacher associations, professional associations, and other 
     reviewers and developers of education materials and programs) 
     qualitative and evaluative materials and programs for the 
     Clearinghouse, review the evaluation of the materials and 
     programs, rank the effectiveness of the materials and 
     programs on the basis of the evaluations, and distribute the 
     results of the reviews to teachers in an easily accessible 
     manner, except that nothing in this subparagraph shall be 
     construed to permit the Clearinghouse to directly conduct an 
     evaluation of the materials or programs.'';
       (B) in paragraph (4), by striking ``or science'' and 
     inserting ``, science, language arts, or social studies''; 
     and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(9) Effective use of technology.--In reviewing 
     evaluations of materials and programs under this subsection 
     the Clearinghouse shall give particular attention to the 
     effective use of education technology in mathematics, 
     science, language arts, and social studies.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 13302(10) of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     8672(10)) is amended by striking ``Mathematics and Science''.

[[Page S1779]]

                      TITLE II--TEACHER MENTORING

     SEC. 201. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The American teaching force is aging. The average 
     school teacher was 43 years old in academic year 1993-1994, 
     an increase of 3 years over the average age of school 
     teachers in academic year 1987-1998. Nearly a quarter of 
     American teachers are over 50 years old and nearing 
     retirement.
       (2) On average public school teachers have slightly more 
     than 15 years teaching experience, and over a third of the 
     public school teachers have 20 or more years of teaching 
     experience.
       (3) The experience of America's veteran teachers should be 
     utilized to help introduce beginning teachers to the 
     profession and to their new school.
       (4) Retention of beginning teachers is a growing problem, 
     with approximately 25 percent of beginning teachers leaving 
     the teaching profession within their first 3 years in the 
     classroom.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this title is to increase 
     teacher retention and improve the support and performance of 
     teachers by encouraging and assisting States to develop and 
     operate mentoring programs for beginning teachers.

     SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.

       The terms used in this title have the meanings given the 
     terms in section 14101 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801).

     SEC. 203. GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary is authorized to award 
     grants to State educational agencies to enable the State 
     educational agencies to carry out mentoring programs under 
     which public elementary school or secondary school teachers 
     with more than 3 years teaching experience serve as mentor 
     teachers to public elementary school or secondary school 
     teachers with less than 3 years teaching experience.
       (b) Amount.--Each State educational agency having an 
     application approved under subsection (d) for a fiscal year 
     shall receive a grant in an amount that bears the same 
     relation to the amount appropriated under subsection (f) for 
     the fiscal year as the number of elementary school and 
     secondary school students in the State for the fiscal year 
     bears to the number of such students in all States for the 
     fiscal year.
       (c) Reallocation.--The amount of a State educational 
     agency's grant that will not be used by the State educational 
     agency for a fiscal year shall be reallotted to the other 
     State educational agency in the same manner as grants are 
     awarded under subsection (b).
       (d) Application.--Each State educational agency that 
     desires a grant under this section shall submit an 
     application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner and 
     accompanied by such information as the Secretary may require. 
     Each such application shall--
       (1) describe the activities and services for which 
     assistance is sought;
       (2) contain an assurance that funds provided under this 
     title will be used to supplement and not supplant State or 
     local public funds available for teacher mentoring programs; 
     and
       (3) contain an assurance that the State educational agency 
     consulted with local educational agencies, school 
     superintendents, school boards, parents, and institutions of 
     higher education in the design and implementation of the 
     teacher mentoring program to be assisted.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this title $5,000,000 for 
     each of the fiscal years 2002 and 2003.

     TITLE III--ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION AND LICENSURE OF TEACHERS

     SEC. 301. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) the measure of a good teacher is how much and how well 
     the teacher's students learn;
       (2) the main teacher quality problem in 1998 was the lack 
     of subject matter knowledge;
       (3) knowledgeable and eager individuals of sound character 
     and various professional backgrounds should be encouraged to 
     enter the kindergarten through grade 12 classrooms as 
     teachers;
       (4) many talented professionals who have demonstrated a 
     high level of subject area competence outside the education 
     profession may wish to pursue careers in education, but have 
     not fulfilled the traditional requirements to be certified or 
     licensed as teachers;
       (5) States should have maximum flexibility and incentives 
     to create alternative teacher certification and licensure 
     programs in order to recruit well-educated people into the 
     teaching profession; and
       (6) alternative routes can enable qualified individuals to 
     fulfill State teacher certification or licensure requirements 
     and will allow school systems to utilize the expertise of 
     professionals and improve the pool of qualified individuals 
     available to local educational agencies as teachers.
       (b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this title to improve 
     the supply of well-qualified elementary school and secondary 
     school teachers by encouraging and assisting States to 
     develop and implement programs for alternative routes to 
     teacher certification or licensure requirements.

     SEC. 302. ALLOTMENTS.

       (a) Allotments to States.--
       (1) In general.--From the amount appropriated to carry out 
     this title for each fiscal year, the Secretary shall allot to 
     each State the lesser of--
       (A) the amount the State applies for under section 303; or
       (B) an amount that bears the same relation to the amount so 
     appropriated as the total population of children ages 5 
     through 17 in the State bears to the total population of such 
     children in all the States (based on the most recent data 
     available that is satisfactory to the Secretary).
       (2) Reallocation.--If a State does not apply for the 
     State's allotment, or the full amount of the State's 
     allotment, under paragraph (1), the Secretary may reallocate 
     the excess funds to 1 or more other States that demonstrate, 
     to the satisfaction of the Secretary, a current need for the 
     funds.
       (b) Special Rule.--Notwithstanding section 421(b) of the 
     General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1225(b)), funds 
     awarded under this title shall remain available for 
     obligation by a recipient for a period of 2 calendar years 
     from the date of the grant.

     SEC. 303. STATE APPLICATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Any State desiring to receive an allotment 
     under this title shall, through the State educational agency, 
     submit an application at such time, in such manner, and 
     containing such information, as the Secretary may reasonably 
     require.
       (b) Requirements.--Each application shall--
       (1) describe the programs, projects, and activities to be 
     undertaken with assistance provided under this title; and
       (2) contain such assurances as the Secretary considers 
     necessary, including assurances that--
       (A) assistance provided to the State educational agency 
     under this title will be used to supplement, and not to 
     supplant, any State or local funds available for the 
     development and implementation of programs to provide 
     alternative routes to fulfilling teacher certification or 
     licensure requirements;
       (B) the State educational agency has, in developing and 
     designing the application, consulted with--
       (i) representatives of local educational agencies, 
     including superintendents and school board members (including 
     representatives of their professional organizations if 
     appropriate);
       (ii) elementary school and secondary school teachers, 
     including representatives of their professional 
     organizations;
       (iii) schools or departments of education within 
     institutions of higher education;
       (iv) parents; and
       (v) other interested individuals and organizations; and
       (C) the State educational agency will submit to the 
     Secretary, at such time as the Secretary may specify, a final 
     report describing the activities carried out with assistance 
     provided under this title and the results achieved with 
     respect to such activities.
       (c) GEPA Provisions Inapplicable.--Sections 441 and 442 of 
     the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232d and 
     1232e), except to the extent that such sections relate to 
     fiscal control and fund accounting procedures, shall not 
     apply to this title.

     SEC. 304. USE OF FUNDS.

       (a) Use of Funds.--
       (1) In general.--A State educational agency shall use funds 
     provided under this title to support programs, projects, or 
     activities that develop and implement new, or expand and 
     improve existing, programs that enable individuals to move to 
     a teaching career in elementary or secondary education from 
     another occupation through an alternative route to teacher 
     certification or licensure.
       (2) Types of assistance.--A State educational agency may 
     carry out such programs, projects, or activities directly, 
     through contracts, or through grants to local educational 
     agencies, intermediate educational agencies, institutions of 
     higher education, or consortia of such agencies or 
     institutions.
       (b) Uses.--Funds received under this title may be used 
     for--
       (1) the design, development, implementation, and evaluation 
     of programs that enable qualified professionals who have 
     demonstrated a high level of subject area competence outside 
     the education profession and are interested in entering the 
     education profession to fulfill State teacher certification 
     or licensure requirements;
       (2) the establishment of administrative structures 
     necessary for the development and implementation of programs 
     to provide alternative routes to fulfilling State teacher 
     certification or licensure requirements;
       (3) training of staff, including the development of 
     appropriate support programs, such as mentor programs, for 
     teachers entering the school system through alternative 
     routes to teacher certification or licensure;
       (4) the development of recruitment strategies;
       (5) the development of reciprocity agreements between or 
     among States for the certification or licensure of teachers; 
     or
       (6) other programs, projects, and activities that--
       (A) are designed to meet the purpose of this title; and
       (B) the Secretary determines appropriate.

     SEC. 305. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Elementary school; local educational agency; secondary 
     school; secretary; and state educational agency.--

[[Page S1780]]

     The terms ``elementary school'', ``local educational 
     agency'', ``secondary school'', ``Secretary'', and ``State 
     educational agency'' have the meanings given the terms in 
     section 14101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
     of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801).
       (2) Institution of higher education.--The term 
     ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1001).
       (3) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the 
     Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin 
     Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands.

     SEC. 306. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $15,000,000 for fiscal year 2002 and each of the 4 
     succeeding fiscal years.

                       TITLE IV--TEACHER QUALITY

     SEC. 401. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) individuals entering a classroom should have a sound 
     grasp of the subject the individuals intend to teach, and the 
     individuals should know how to teach;
       (2) the quality of teachers impacts student achievement;
       (3) people who enter the teaching profession through 
     alternative certification programs can benefit from having 
     the opportunity to attend a teacher training facility;
       (4) teachers need to increase their subject matter 
     knowledge;
       (5) less than 40 percent of the individuals teaching the 
     core subjects (English, mathematics, science, social studies, 
     and foreign languages) majored or minored in the core 
     subjects; and
       (6) according to the Third International Mathematics and 
     Science Study, American high school seniors finished near the 
     bottom of the study in both science and mathematics.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this title is to strengthen 
     teacher training programs by establishing a private and 
     public partnership to create the best teacher training 
     facilities in the world to ensure that teachers receive 
     unlimited access to the most updated technology and skills 
     training in education, so that students can benefit from the 
     teachers' knowledge and experience.

     SEC. 402. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Local educational agency.--The term ``local educational 
     agency'' has the meaning given the term in section 14101 of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     8801).
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Education.

     SEC. 403. GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--From amounts appropriated under section 
     404 for a fiscal year the Secretary shall award grants to 
     local educational agencies to enable the local educational 
     agencies to establish teacher training facilities for 
     elementary and secondary school teachers.
       (b) Competitive Basis.--The Secretary shall award grants 
     under this title on a competitive basis.
       (c) Partnership Contract Required.--In order to receive a 
     grant under this title, a local educational agency shall 
     enter into a contract with a nongovernmental organization to 
     establish a teacher training facility.
       (d) Applications.--Each local educational agency desiring a 
     grant under this title shall submit to the Secretary an 
     application at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by 
     such information as the Secretary may require. Each such 
     application shall contain an assurance that the local 
     educational agency--
       (1) will raise matching funds, from public or private 
     sources, for the support of the teacher training facility in 
     an amount equal to the amount of funds provided under the 
     grant;
       (2) will train the teachers employed by the local 
     educational agency at the teacher training facility for a 
     period of 10 years after the date the agency enters into the 
     contract described in subsection (c); and
       (3) will spend not less than 0.5 percent of the local 
     educational agency's total school budget for each fiscal year 
     to support the teacher training facility.
       (e) Amount.--The Secretary shall award each grant under 
     this section in an amount that is not less than $1,000,000 
     and not more than $4,000,000.

     SEC. 404. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2002, $12,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 2003, $12,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, and $16,000,000 
     for fiscal year 2005.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FRIST (for himself and Mr. Thompson):
  S. 439. A bill to authorize the establishment of a suboffice of the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service in Nashville, Tennessee; to the 
Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, today, I introduce the Nashville INS Sub-
office Act along with Senator Thompson. This bill addresses important 
immigration issues facing Tennessee by authorizing funds for a much 
needed INS sub-office in Nashville.
  The Mid-South region is experiencing exceptional population growth 
from not only other parts of the nation, but also from a significant 
number of foreign nationals looking to relocate. As a result of this 
new influx in population, the existing Memphis INS office is 
overstretched and facing an enormous backlog of cases. As the largest 
metropolitan area in the state, it only makes sense to open another INS 
office in Nashville.
  The new office would be geographically positioned to better provide 
the necessary services for individuals living in Middle and East 
Tennessee. It would also help alleviate the excessive burden facing the 
Memphis office by transferring a large portion of its workload. The new 
Nashville sub-office would improve overall services and enables the INS 
to better address illegal immigration concerns in our area.
  I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 439

       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 ``Nashville INS Suboffice 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) The Immigration and Naturalization Service field office 
     in Memphis, Tennessee, is designated as a suboffice within 
     the jurisdiction of the district office in New Orleans, 
     Louisiana.
       (2) Over the past 10 years, the foreign national population 
     has grown substantially in the jurisdictional area of the 
     Memphis suboffice.
       (3) It is estimated that more than 200,000 foreign 
     nationals are residing in the jurisdictional area of the 
     Memphis suboffice.
       (4) The Memphis suboffice has pending an equal or greater 
     number of cases, and receives as many new cases, as the New 
     Orleans district office.
       (5) Approximately 46 percent of the total number of 
     permanent resident applications received by the Memphis 
     suboffice come from individuals residing in middle and 
     eastern Tennessee.
       (6) In many instances, such individuals have to travel 3 to 
     6 hours each way to Memphis to receive service.
       (7) Nashville is a logical location for a new Immigration 
     and Naturalization Service suboffice because its central 
     location will reduce such travel time and allow the 
     Immigration and Naturalization Service to provide better and 
     more efficient service to such individuals.
       (8) As the largest metropolitan area in the State of 
     Tennessee, major routes from across the State flow into 
     Nashville and air transportation is readily available there.
       (9) Establishment of a Nashville suboffice would make a 
     strong statement about the commitment of the Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service to gaining control over illegal 
     immigration and would facilitate legal immigration and 
     citizenship initiatives in central and eastern Tennessee.
       (10) Congress has identified Nashville as a region 
     underserved by the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for each 
     fiscal year to establish and operate an Immigration and 
     Naturalization Service suboffice in Nashville, Tennessee. 
     Such suboffice shall have jurisdiction over the following 
     counties in the State of Tennessee: Anderson, Bedford, 
     Bledsoe, Blount, Bradley, Campbell, Cannon, Carter, Cheatham, 
     Claiborne, Clay, Cocke, Coffee, Cumberland, Davidson, Dekalb, 
     Dickson, Fentress, Franklin, Giles, Grainger, Greene, Grundy, 
     Hamblen, Hamilton, Hancock, Hardin, Hawkins, Hickman, 
     Houston, Humphries, Jackson, Jefferson, Johnson, Knox, 
     Lawrence, Lewis, Lincoln, Loudon, Macon, Marion, Marshall, 
     Maury, McMinn, Meigs, Moore, Monroe, Montgomery, Morgan, 
     Overton, Perry, Pickett, Polk, Putnam, Rhea, Roane, 
     Robertson, Rutherford, Scott, Sevier, Sequatchie, Smith, 
     Stewart, Sullivan, Sumner, Trousdale, Unicoi, Union, Van 
     Buren, Warren, Washington, Wayne, White, Williamson, and 
     Wilson.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 440. A bill to establish a matching grant program to help State 
and local jurisdictions purchase bullet-resistant equipment for use by 
law enforcement departments; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing a package of four 
bills that will help improve our nation's justice system and honor 
those law enforcement officers and firefighters who gave their lives in 
the line of duty.
  The first bill I am introducing is the Officer Dale Claxton Bullet 
Resistant Police Protective Equipment Act of 2001, an updated version 
of legislation I introduced during the last Congress.

[[Page S1781]]

  This bill is named in honor of Officer Dale Claxton of Cortez, CO, a 
fine law enforcement officer and family man, who was fatally shot 
through the windshield of his patrol car on May 29, 1998, after 
stopping a stolen truck. His assailants turned out to be dangerous 
fugitives and a large-scale man hunt was launched. Officer Claxton was 
tragically and prematurely taken away from his wife and four children.
  The Officer Dale Claxton Act would help law enforcement agencies 
acquire bullet resistant equipment including bullet resistant glass for 
law enforcement vehicles, hand-held shields and any other equipment 
that officers may need when they serve on the front lines of law 
enforcement. Specifically, this legislation would help our nation's 
state and local law enforcement officers acquire the bullet resistant 
equipment they need to protect themselves from would-be killers. This 
legislation would authorize the Department of Justice's Bureau of 
Justice Assistance to administer a $40 million matching grant program 
to assist these agencies purchase bullet resistant equipment.
  This legislation is a worthy companion, and similar in many ways, to 
the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act, P.L. 105-181, which I 
introduced and the President signed into law on June 16, 1998. The 
legislation I am introducing today would help state and local law 
enforcement agencies acquire a wider array of bullet resistant 
equipment to supplement bullet proof vests.
  As a former deputy sheriff, I am personally aware of the dangers 
which law enforcement officers face on the front lines every day. One 
way in which the federal government can improve their safety is to help 
them acquire bullet resistant glass and other equipment for patrol 
cars. These partnership grants are especially crucial for officers who 
serve in small local jurisdictions that often lack the funds to provide 
their officers with the life saving equipment they may need.
  The second component of this legislation would launch an expedited 
and targeted research and development by authorizing $3 million over 3 
years for the Justice Department's National Institute of Justice, NIJ, 
to conduct research and development of a new bullet resistant 
technologies, such as bonded acrylic, polymers, polycarbons, aluminized 
material, and transparent ceramics.
  Promising new bullet resistant materials now being developed could be 
as revolutionary in coming years as the development of Kevlar was in 
the 1970s for the manufacture of body armor. These exciting new 
technologies promise to be lighter, more versatile and hopefully less 
expensive than traditional heavy bulletproof glass.
  Our Nation's police officers, sheriffs and deputies regularly put 
their lives in harm's way as they protect the people and preserve the 
peace. They deserve to have access to the bullet resistant equipment 
they need. The Officer Dale Claxton bill will both accelerate the 
development of new lifesaving bullet resistant technologies and then 
help get them deployed into the field where they are needed. Officers 
lives will be saved.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Officer Dale Claxton Bullet 
Resistant Police Protective Equipment Act of 2001 be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 440

       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 ``Officer Dale Claxton 
     Bulletproof Police Protective Equipment Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) Officer Dale Claxton of the Cortez, Colorado, Police 
     Department was shot and killed by bullets that passed through 
     the windshield of his police car after he stopped a stolen 
     truck, and his life may have been saved if his police car had 
     been equipped with bullet-resistant equipment;
       (2) the number of law enforcement officers who are killed 
     in the line of duty would significantly decrease if every law 
     enforcement officer in the United States had access to 
     additional bullet-resistant equipment;
       (3) according to studies, between 1990 and 2000, 1,700 law 
     enforcement officers in the United States were shot and 
     killed in the line of duty;
       (4) the Federal Bureau of Investigation estimates that the 
     risk of fatality to law enforcement officers while not 
     wearing bullet-resistant equipment, such as an armor vest, is 
     14 times higher than for officers wearing an armor vest; and
       (5) the Executive Committee for Indian Country Law 
     Enforcement Improvements reports that violent crime in Indian 
     country has risen sharply despite a decrease in the national 
     crime rate, and has concluded that there is a ``public safety 
     crisis in Indian country''.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to save lives of 
     law enforcement officers by helping State, local, and tribal 
     law enforcement agencies provide officers with bullet-
     resistant equipment and video cameras.

     SEC. 3. MATCHING GRANT PROGRAM FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT BULLET-
                   RESISTANT EQUIPMENT.

       (a) In General.--Part Y of title I of the Omnibus Crime 
     Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 is amended--
       (1) by striking the part designation and part heading and 
     inserting the following:

         ``PART Y--MATCHING GRANT PROGRAMS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT

             ``Subpart A--Grant Program for Armor Vests'';

       (2) by striking ``this part'' each place that term appears 
     and inserting ``this subpart''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:

       ``Subpart B--Grant Program for Bullet-Resistant Equipment

     ``SEC. 2511. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

       ``(a) In General.--The Director of the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance is authorized to make grants to States, units of 
     local government, and Indian tribes to purchase bullet-
     resistant equipment for use by State, local, and tribal law 
     enforcement officers.
       ``(b) Uses of Funds.--Grants awarded under this section 
     shall be--
       ``(1) distributed directly to the State, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe; and
       ``(2) used for the purchase of bullet-resistant equipment 
     for law enforcement officers in the jurisdiction of the 
     grantee.
       ``(c) Preferential Consideration.--In awarding grants under 
     this subpart, the Director of the Bureau of Justice 
     Assistance may give preferential consideration, if feasible, 
     to an application from a jurisdiction that--
       ``(1) has the greatest need for bullet-resistant equipment 
     based on the percentage of law enforcement officers in the 
     department who do not have access to a vest;
       ``(2) has a violent crime rate at or above the national 
     average as determined by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; 
     or
       ``(3) has not received a block grant under the Local Law 
     Enforcement Block Grant program described under the heading 
     `State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance' of the 
     Departments of Commerce Justice, and State, the Judiciary, 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 
     106-553).
       ``(d) Minimum Amount.--Unless all eligible applications 
     submitted by any State or unit of local government within 
     such State for a grant under this section have been funded, 
     such State, together with grantees within the State (other 
     than Indian tribes), shall be allocated in each fiscal year 
     under this section not less than 0.50 percent of the total 
     amount appropriated in the fiscal year for grants pursuant to 
     this section except that the United States Virgin Islands, 
     American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands shall 
     each be allocated 0.25 percent.
       ``(e) Maximum Amount.--A qualifying State, unit of local 
     government, or Indian tribe may not receive more than 5 
     percent of the total amount appropriated in each fiscal year 
     for grants under this section, except that a State, together 
     with the grantees within the State may not receive more than 
     20 percent of the total amount appropriated in each fiscal 
     year for grants under this section.
       ``(f) Matching Funds.--The portion of the costs of a 
     program provided by a grant under subsection (a) may not 
     exceed 50 percent. Any funds appropriated by Congress for the 
     activities of any agency of an Indian tribal government or 
     the Bureau of Indian Affairs performing law enforcement 
     functions on any Indian lands may be used to provide the non-
     Federal share of a matching requirement funded under this 
     subsection.
       ``(g) Allocation of Funds.--At least half of the funds 
     available under this subpart shall be awarded to units of 
     local government with fewer than 100,000 residents.

     ``SEC. 2512. APPLICATIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--To request a grant under this subpart, 
     the chief executive of a State, unit of local government, or 
     Indian tribe shall submit an application to the Director of 
     the Bureau of Justice Assistance in such form and containing 
     such information as the Director may reasonably require.
       ``(b) Regulations.--Not later than 90 days after the date 
     of enactment of this subpart, the Director of the Bureau of 
     Justice Assistance shall promulgate regulations to implement 
     this section (including the information that must be included 
     and the requirements that the States, units of local 
     government, and Indian tribes must meet) in submitting the 
     applications required under this section.
       ``(c) Eligibility.--A unit of local government that 
     receives funding under the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant 
     program, described under the heading `State and Local Law 
     Enforcement Assistance' of the Departments of Commerce, 
     Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2001 (Public Law 106-553), during a

[[Page S1782]]

     fiscal year in which it submits an application under this 
     subpart shall not be eligible for a grant under this subpart 
     unless the chief executive officer of such unit of local 
     government certifies and provides an explanation to the 
     Director that the unit of local government considered or will 
     consider using funding received under the block grant program 
     for any or all of the costs relating to the purchase of 
     bullet-resistant equipment, but did not, or does not expect 
     to use such funds for such purpose.

     ``SEC. 2513. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this subpart--
       ``(1) the term `equipment' means windshield glass, car 
     panels, shields, and protective gear;
       ``(2) the term `State' means each of the 50 States, the 
     District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 
     United States Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the 
     Northern Mariana Islands;
       ``(3) the term `unit of local government' means a county, 
     municipality, town, township, village, parish, borough, or 
     other unit of general government below the State level;
       ``(4) the term `Indian tribe' has the same meaning as in 
     section 4(e) of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
     Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b(e)); and
       ``(5) the term `law enforcement officer' means any officer, 
     agent, or employee of a State, unit of local government, or 
     Indian tribe authorized by law or by a government agency to 
     engage in or supervise the prevention, detection, or 
     investigation of any violation of criminal law, or authorized 
     by law to supervise sentenced criminal offenders.''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1001(a) of 
     the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 
     U.S.C. 3793(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (23) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(23) There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out 
     part Y--
       ``(A) $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 
     2004 for grants under subpart A of that part; and
       ``(B) $40,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 
     2004 for grants under subpart B of that part.''.

     SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       In the case of any equipment or products that may be 
     authorized to be purchased with financial assistance provided 
     using funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this 
     Act, it is the sense of Congress that entities receiving the 
     assistance should, in expending the assistance, purchase only 
     American-made equipment and products.

     SEC. 5. TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.

       Section 202 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and 
     Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3722) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Bullet-Resistant Technology Development.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Institute is authorized to--
       ``(A) conduct research and otherwise work to develop new 
     bullet-resistant technologies (i.e., acrylic, polymers, 
     aluminized material, and transparent ceramics) for use in 
     police equipment (including windshield glass, car panels, 
     shields, and protective gear);
       ``(B) inventory bullet-resistant technologies used in the 
     private sector, in surplus military property, and by foreign 
     countries; and
       ``(C) promulgate relevant standards for, and conduct 
     technical and operational testing and evaluation of, bullet-
     resistant technology and equipment, and otherwise facilitate 
     the use of that technology in police equipment.
       ``(2) Priority.--In carrying out this subsection, the 
     Institute shall give priority in testing and engineering 
     surveys to law enforcement partnerships developed in 
     coordination with high-intensity drug trafficking areas.
       ``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $3,000,000 
     for fiscal years 2002 through 2004.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELl (for himself, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Feingold, Mr. 
        Inouye, Mr. Levin, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 441. A bill to provide Capitol-flown flags to the families of law 
enforcement officers and firefighters killed in the line of duty; to 
the Committee on Rules and Administration.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, the second bill I am introducing today 
is the ``Fallen Law Enforcement Officers and Firefighters Flag Memorial 
Act of 2001.''
  I am pleased to be joined today by my colleagues, Senators McConnell, 
Feingold, Inouye, Levin, Dayton, Stevens, and Lugar who are original 
cosponsors.
  This bill would help honor the sacrifice of the men and women who 
lost their lives in the line of duty by providing Capitol-flown flags 
to the families of deceased law enforcement officers and firefighters.
  Under this legislation, the family of a deceased law enforcement 
officer can request from the Attorney General a flag flown over the 
U.S. Capitol in honor of the slain officer. The Department of Justice 
shall pay the cost of the flags, including shipping, out of 
discretionary grant funds, and provide them to the victim's family.
  As a former deputy sheriff, I know firsthand the risks which law 
enforcement officers face everyday on the front lines protecting our 
communities. I also have great appreciation, as the Co-Chair of the 
Congressional Fire Caucus, for the service that our nation's 
firefighters provide, day in and day out, and that all too often, they 
end up sacrificing their lives while saving others.
  I believe providing a Capitol-flown flag is a fitting way to show our 
appreciation for fallen officers and firefighters who make the ultimate 
sacrifice. It also lets their families know that Congress and the 
nation are grateful for their loved ones' service.
  I ask unanimous consent that the Fallen Law Enforcement Officers and 
Firefighters Flag Memorial Act of 2001 be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 441

       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 ``Fallen Law Enforcement 
     Officers and Firefighters Flag Memorial Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. CAPITOL-FLOWN FLAGS FOR FAMILIES OF DECEASED LAW 
                   ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.

       (a) Authority.--
       (1) In general.--The family of a deceased law enforcement 
     officer may request, and the Attorney General shall provide 
     to such family, a Capitol-flown flag, which shall be supplied 
     to the Attorney General by the Architect of the Capitol. The 
     Department of Justice shall pay the cost of such flag, 
     including shipping, out of discretionary grant funds.
       (2) Effective date.--Paragraph (1) shall take effect on the 
     date on which the Attorney General establishes the procedure 
     required by subsection (b).
       (b) Procedure.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall establish a 
     procedure (including any appropriate forms) by which the 
     family of a deceased law enforcement officer may request, and 
     provide sufficient information to determine such officer's 
     eligibility for, a Capitol-flown flag.
       (c) Applicability.--This Act shall only apply to a deceased 
     law enforcement officer who died on or after the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
       (d) Definitions.--In this Act--
       (1) the term ``Capitol-flown flag'' means a United States 
     flag flown over the United States Capitol in honor of the 
     deceased law enforcement officer for whom such flag is 
     requested; and
       (2) the term ``deceased law enforcement officer'' means a 
     person who was charged with protecting public safety, who was 
     authorized to make arrests by a Federal, State, Tribal, 
     county, or local law enforcement agency, and who died while 
     acting in the line of duty.

     SEC. 3. CAPITOL-FLOWN FLAGS FOR FAMILIES OF DECEASED 
                   FIREFIGHTERS.

       (a) Authority.--The family of a paid or volunteer 
     firefighter who dies in the line of duty may request, and the 
     Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall 
     provide to such family, a capitol-flown flag, which shall be 
     supplied to the Director by the Architect of the Capitol. The 
     Federal Emergency Management Agency shall pay the cost of 
     such flag, including shipping, out of discretionary grant 
     funds.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the 
     date on which the Attorney General establishes the procedure 
     required by section 2(b).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 442. A bill to exempt qualified current and former law enforcement 
officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms 
and to allow States to enter into compacts to recognize other States' 
concealed weapons permits; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, the third bill I am introducing today is 
a bill to authorize states to recognize each other's concealed weapons 
laws and exempt qualified current and former law enforcement officers 
from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms. This 
legislation is designed to support the rights of States and to 
facilitate the right of law-abiding citizens as well as law enforcement 
officers to protect themselves, their families, and their property.
  The language of this bill is based on S. 727, which I introduced in 
the 106th Congress. Specifically, this bill allows States to enter into 
agreements, known as ``compacts,'' to recognize the concealed weapons 
laws of those States included in the compacts. This is not a

[[Page S1783]]

Federal mandate; it is strictly voluntary for those States interested 
in this approach. States would also be allowed to include provisions 
which best meet their needs, such as special provisions for law 
enforcement personnel.
  Currently, a Federal standard governs the conduct of nonresidents in 
those States that do not have a right-to-carry statute. Many of us in 
this body have always worked to protect the interests of States and 
communities by allowing them to make important decisions on how their 
affairs should be conducted. We are taking to the floor almost every 
day to talk about mandating certain things to the States. This bill 
would allow States to decide for themselves.
  I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Congressional 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 442

       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 ``Law Enforcement Protection 
     Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. EXEMPTION OF QUALIFIED CURRENT AND FORMER LAW 
                   ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS FROM STATE LAWS 
                   PROHIBITING THE CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS.

       (a) In General.--Chapter 44 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by inserting after section 926A the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 926B. CARRYING OF CONCEALED FIREARMS BY QUALIFIED 
                   CURRENT AND FORMER LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any provision of the law 
     of any State or any political subdivision of a State, an 
     individual may carry a concealed firearm if that individual 
     is--
       ``(1) a qualified law enforcement officer or a qualified 
     former law enforcement officer; and
       ``(2) carrying appropriate written identification.
       ``(b) Effect on Other Laws.--
       ``(1) Common carriers.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to exempt from section 46505(B)(1) of title 49--
       ``(A) a qualified law enforcement officer who does not meet 
     the requirements of section 46505(D) of title 49; or
       ``(B) a qualified former law enforcement officer.
       ``(2) Federal laws.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to supersede or limit any Federal law or regulation 
     prohibiting or restricting the possession of a firearm on any 
     Federal property, installation, building, base, or park.
       ``(3) State laws.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to supersede or limit the laws of any State that--
       ``(A) grant rights to carry a concealed firearm that are 
     broader than the rights granted under this section;
       ``(B) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or 
     restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their 
     property; or
       ``(C) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on 
     any State or local government property, installation, 
     building, base, or park.
       ``(4) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(A) Appropriate written identification.--The term 
     `appropriate written identification' means, with respect to 
     an individual, a document that--
       ``(i) was issued to the individual by the public agency 
     with which the individual serves or served as a qualified law 
     enforcement officer; and
       ``(ii) identifies the holder of the document as a current 
     or former officer, agent, or employee of the agency.
       ``(B) Firearm.--The term `firearm' means, any firearm that 
     has, or of which any component has, traveled in interstate or 
     foreign commerce.
       ``(C) Qualified former law enforcement officer.--The term 
     `qualified former law enforcement officer' means, an 
     individual who is--
       ``(i) retired from service with a public agency, other than 
     for reasons of mental disability;
       ``(ii) immediately before such retirement, was a qualified 
     law enforcement officer with that public agency;
       ``(iii) has a nonforfeitable right to benefits under the 
     retirement plan of the agency;
       ``(iv) was not separated from service with a public agency 
     due to a disciplinary action by the agency that prevented the 
     carrying of a firearm;
       ``(v) meets the requirements established by the State in 
     which the individual resides with respect to--

       ``(I) training in the use of firearms; and
       ``(II) carrying a concealed weapon; and

       ``(vi) is not prohibited by Federal law from receiving a 
     firearm.
       ``(D) Qualified law enforcement officer.--The term 
     `qualified law enforcement officer' means an individual who--
       ``(i) is presently authorized by law to engage in or 
     supervise the prevention, detection, or investigation of any 
     violation of criminal law;
       ``(ii) is authorized by the agency to carry a firearm in 
     the course of duty;
       ``(iii) meets any requirements established by the agency 
     with respect to firearms; and
       ``(iv) is not the subject of a disciplinary action by the 
     agency that prevents the carrying of a firearm.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 
     44 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting 
     after the item relating to section 926A the following:

``926B. Carrying of concealed firearms by qualified current and former 
              law enforcement officers.''.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION TO ENTER INTO INTERSTATE COMPACTS.

       (a) In General.--The consent of Congress is given to any 2 
     or more States--
       (1) to enter into compacts or agreements for cooperative 
     effort in enabling individuals to carry concealed weapons as 
     dictated by laws of the State within which the owner of the 
     weapon resides and is authorized to carry a concealed weapon; 
     and
       (2) to establish agencies or guidelines as they may 
     determine to be appropriate for making effective such 
     agreements and compacts.
       (b) Reservation of Rights.--The right to alter, amend, or 
     repeal this section is hereby expressly reserved by Congress.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 443. A bill to amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, 
to increase the maximum term of imprisonment for offenses involving 
stolen firearms; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, the fourth bill I am introducing today 
is the ``Stolen Gun Penalty Enhancement Act of 2001'' which would 
increase the maximum prison sentences for violating existing stolen gun 
laws.
  Many crimes in our country are being committed with stolen guns. The 
extent of this problem is reflected in a number of recent studies and 
news reports which indicate that almost half a million guns are stolen 
each year.
  This problem is especially alarming among young people. A Justice 
Department study of juvenile inmates in four states shows that over 50 
percent of those inmates had stolen a gun. In the same study, gang 
members and drug sellers were more likely to have stolen a gun.
  Specifically, this bill would increase the maximum penalty for 
violating four provisions of the firearms laws. Under title 18 of the 
U.S. Code, it is illegal to knowingly transport or ship a stolen 
firearm or stolen ammunition. It is also illegal to knowingly receive, 
possess, conceal, store, sell, or otherwise dispose of a stolen firearm 
or stolen ammunition. The penalty for violating either of these 
provisions is a fine, a maximum term of imprisonment of 10 years, or 
both. My bill increases the maximum prison sentence to 15 years.
  Mr. President, I am a strong supporter of the rights of law-abiding 
gun owners. However, I firmly believe we need tough penalties for the 
illegal use of firearms.
  The Stolen Gun Penalty Enhancement Act of 2001 will send a strong 
signal to criminals who are even thinking about stealing a firearm. I 
urge my colleagues to join in support of this legislation.
  Mr. Preisent, I ask unanimous consent that the Stolen Gun Penalty 
Enhancement Act of 2001 be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 443

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

     SECTION 1. STOLEN FIREARMS.

       (a) In General.--Section 924 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``(i), (j),''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) Whoever knowingly violates subsection (i) or (j) of 
     section 922 shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not 
     more than 15 years, or both.'';
       (2) in subsection (i)(1), by striking ``10 years'' and 
     inserting ``15 years''; and
       (3) in subsection (l), by striking ``10 years'' and 
     inserting ``15 years''.
       (b) Sentencing Commission.--The United States Sentencing 
     Commission shall amend the Federal sentencing guidelines to 
     reflect the amendments made by subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WELLSTONE (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Schumer):
  S. 444. A bill to amend title II of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act of 1965 to support teacher corps programs, and for other 
purposes; to

[[Page S1784]]

the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if there is one thing we all can agree 
on in education, it is that quality teachers are absolutely critical to 
how well children learn. Yet, the nation confronts one of the worst 
teacher shortages in history. With expanding enrollment, decreasing 
class size and one third of the nation's teachers nearing retirement 
age, public schools will need to hire as many as 2.2 million teachers 
over the next decade.
  The need is greatest in specific subject areas such as mathematics, 
science, special education and bilingual education, all important 
subjects if the nation is to have an educated work force to keep it 
competitive in the world marketplace.
  Teacher shortages are also greatest in specific geographical areas 
such as the inner city and rural areas. Ironically, it is the most 
educationally and socio-economically disadvantaged students that are 
under-served. If there is one action we can take that is guaranteed to 
help struggling schools and children, it is to provide states and 
school districts the means to ensure that there is a highly qualified 
teacher in every class room.
  My bill, Teacher Corps, which I am proud to introduce today with my 
colleagues, Senators Kennedy and Schumer, who for so long have fought 
to bring the best possible educational opportunities to all of 
America's children, is designed to do just that. Its components are 
based on a definite need and sound research concerning effective 
mechanisms for meeting that need.
  Teacher Corps would fund collaboratives between state education 
agencies, local education agencies and institutions of higher 
education. The collaboratives would recruit top ranked college students 
and qualified mid career individuals, who have not yet been trained as 
teachers, to teach in the nation's poorest schools in the areas of 
greatest need--both geographically and academically. Districts and 
universities would work together to recruit only candidates who have an 
academic major or extensive and substantive professional experience in 
the subject in which they will teach.
  The collaboratives would provide recruits a tuition free alternative 
route to certification which includes intensive study and a teaching 
internship. The internship would include mentoring, co-teaching and 
advanced course work in pedagogy, state standards, technology and other 
areas.
  After the internship period, the collaboratives would offer 
individualized follow up training and mentoring in the first two years 
of full time teaching.
  Corps members that become certified will be given priority in hiring 
within that district in exchange for a commitment to teach in low 
income schools for 3 years.
  A good teacher can mean the world to any child whether it is through 
caring or through providing children with the skills they need to open 
their own doors to the future. Every time I enter schools in Minnesota, 
I am in awe of teachers' work. When a skilled, energetic teacher 
creates an invigorating learning environment for his or her students it 
is truly a magical thing. In my travels to schools around Minnesota and 
the country I see a great deal of that magic happening.
  That is why it is so tragic to think that there are so many children 
that do not have access to qualified teachers, at the same time that 
many people interested in teaching are either not entering the 
profession or are not staying there once they have qualified.
  Teacher Corps will help meet the growing need for teachers in low 
income urban and rural schools, and in high need subject areas such as 
math, science, bilingual and special education.
  It will do so because Teacher Corps is rooted in three fundamental 
parts. Recruitment, retention and innovative, flexible, high quality 
training programs for college graduates and mid-career professionals 
who want to teach in high need areas.
  The first principle is recruitment. As I mentioned before, we may 
need to hire as many as 2.2 million new teachers in the next decade to 
ensure that there are enough teachers in our schools. But, overall 
quantity is not the only issue. Quality and shortages in specific 
geographic and curriculum areas are equally critical. While there are 
teacher surpluses in some areas, certain states and cities are facing 
acute teacher shortages. In California, 1 out of every 10 teachers 
lacks proper credentials. Fifty-eight percent of new hires in Los 
Angeles are not certified.
  There are also crucial shortages in some subject areas such as math, 
science, bilingual and special education. In my home state of 
Minnesota, 90 percent of principals report a serious shortage of strong 
candidates in at least one curriculum area. Fifty-four percent of the 
mathematics teachers in the state of Idaho and 48 percent of the 
science teachers in Florida and Tennessee did not major in the subject 
of their primary assignment.
  The report recently released by the Commission chaired by our former 
colleague John Glenn highlights this problem in the area of math and 
science teaching. The Glenn Commission--in its report ominously, but 
accurately, titled ``Before It's Too Late''--called on all the 
decision-makers in our country to establish an ongoing system to 
improve the quality of mathematics and science teaching in our 
elementary and secondary schools and to improve the quality of those 
teachers' preparation for the classroom.
  Teacher Corps would meet this need because it would recruit and train 
thousands of high quality teachers into the field to meet the specific 
teaching needs of local school districts.
  It would recruit and train top college students and mid-career 
professionals from around the country, who increasingly want to enter 
the teaching profession.

  More college students want to enter teaching today than have wanted 
to join the profession in the past 30 years. In the surveys of incoming 
college students that UCLA conducts each fall, in recent years over 10 
percent of all freshman consistently have said they want to teach in 
elementary and secondary schools.
  Second, the design of the program ensures that the needs of local 
school districts will be considered so that only those candidates who 
meet the specific needs of that district will be recruited and trained. 
If, for example, there is a shortage of special education, bilingual, 
math and science teachers in a particular district, Teacher Corps would 
train people with only those skills. In setting up collaboratives in 
this way, teacher corps helps avoid the overproduction of candidates in 
areas where they are not needed.
  Finally, Teacher Corps gives priority to high-need rural, inner 
suburban and urban districts to ensure that new teachers will enter 
where they are needed most.
  However, it does not help to recruit teachers into high-need schools 
and train them if we cannot retain them in the profession. Teaching is 
one of the hardest, most important jobs there is. We ask teachers to 
prepare our children for adulthood. We ask them to educate our children 
so that they may be productive members of society. We entrust them with 
our children's minds and with their future. It is a disgrace how little 
support we give them in return. It is no surprise that one of the major 
causes of our teacher shortage is that teachers decide to change 
professions before retirement. Seventy-three percent of Minnesota 
teachers who leave the profession, leave for reasons other than 
retirement. In urban schools, 50 percent of teachers leave the field 
within five years of when they start teaching.
  To retain high quality teachers in the profession, we must give 
teachers the support they deserve. Teachers, like doctors, need 
mentoring and support during the first years of their professional 
life. Teacher Corps offers new teachers the training, mentoring and 
support they need to meet the profession's many challenges. It includes 
methods of support that have proven effective in ensuring that teachers 
stay in schools. The key elements for effective teacher retention were 
laid out by the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future in 
1996. Effective programs organize professional development around 
standards for teachers and students; provide a year long, pre-service 
internship; include mentoring and strong evaluation of teacher skills; 
offer stable, high quality professional development.

[[Page S1785]]

  Each of these criteria are included in the Teacher Corps program.
  Further, Teacher Corps supports people who choose teaching by paying 
for their training. Through this financial and professional support, 
Teacher Corps will go a long way toward keeping recruits in teaching.
  But, it is still not enough to recruit and retain teachers. Quality 
must be of primary importance. Research shows that the most important 
predictor of student success is not income, but the quality of the 
teacher. Despite this need, studies show that as the proportion of 
students of color and students from low-income families increases in 
schools, the test scores of teachers decline.
  This is wrong. We are denying children from low income areas, 
children from racial minorities, children with limited English 
proficiency, access to what we know works. Several studies have shown 
that if poor and minority students are taught by high quality teachers 
at the same rate as other students, a large part of the gap between 
poor and minority students and their more affluent white counterparts 
would disappear. For example, one Alabama study shows that an increase 
of one standard deviation in teacher test scores leads to a two-third 
reduction in the gap between black/white tests scores.
  We cannot turn our back on this knowledge. We must act on it. We must 
give low income, minority and limited English proficiency children the 
same opportunities that all children have and we must do it now.
  The very essence of Teacher Corps is to funnel high quality teachers 
where they are needed most. Teacher Corps would help ensure quality by 
using a selective, competitive recruitment process. It would provide 
high quality training, professional development, mentoring and 
evaluations of corps member performance, all of which have been proven 
to increase the quality of the teaching force and the achievement of 
the students they teach.
  Further, by creating strong connections between universities and 
districts and by implementing effective professional development 
projects within districts, we are setting up powerful structures to 
benefit all teachers and students.
  We have an opportunity to do what we know works to help children who 
need our help most. Good teachers have an extraordinary impact on 
children's lives and learning. We need to be sure that all children 
have access to such teachers and all children have the opportunity to 
learn so that all children may take advantage of the many opportunities 
this country provides.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WELLSTONE:
  S. 445. A bill to provide for local family information centers, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President: I rise today to introduce legislation 
that will go a long way to increase the accountability of our schools 
and to help parents become more involved in their children's education. 
We all know that families are crucial to improving our nation's 
schools. To ensure that schools and students meet challenging 
educational goals, families must be involved. Parents must insist that 
their children get the best education. They must understand, shape and 
support the reforms in their schools; and, they must work with schools 
to help all children meet their goals.
  We know that when families are fully engaged in the educational 
process, students have: higher grades and test scores; better 
attendance and more homework done; fewer placements in special 
education; more positive attitudes and behavior; higher graduation 
rates; and greater enrollment in post-secondary education.
  For school reforms to help all children, we must move to ensure that 
all parents are involved in their children's education. For many 
parents, this is not an easy task. Parents, particularly those who have 
limited English proficiency, those who are homeless, or those who have 
a troubled history with the school system, often need outside help to 
get the information, support, and training they need to help their 
children navigate through the school system.
  Parent involvement is more important now than ever before. As we move 
in the direction of increased accountability, high stakes testing and 
expanded public school choice, it is critical that parents know 
everything that is required of them and their children. They need to be 
sure that they have access to every aspect of their child's schooling, 
or their child could easily be left behind.
  Current provisions in Title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act provide for excellent and important ways for parents to 
get involved in their children's education. However, in some cases, 
parent involvement of the type envisioned by Title I remains a distant 
goal. Many Title I schools, though not all, have failed to fully bring 
parents into the development of parent involvement policies, school-
parent compacts, and into planning and improvement for the school as 
provided for in Title I. Therefore, it is essential for families to 
have an independent source of information and support that they 
understand and trust so that they can participate in an informed and 
effective manner and help move the schools toward the goal of full 
parental participation.
  To achieve this critical end, this legislation would provide 
competitive grants to community-based organizations to establish Local 
Family Information Centers. These centers, made up of community members 
as well as professionals from the Title I schools in the area, should 
have a track record of effective outreach and work with low income 
communities. They, in consultation with the school district, would 
develop a plan to provide parents with the full support that they need 
to be partners in their children's education. For example, they would 
help parents understand standards, tests, and accountability systems; 
support activities that are likely to improve student achievement in 
Title I schools; understand and analyze data that schools, districts, 
and states must provide under reporting requirements of ESEA and other 
laws; understand and participate in the implementation of parent 
involvement requirements of ESEA, including; understand school choice 
options; and, communicate effectively with school personnel.
  This legislation is essential because it would reach and assist 
parents most isolated from participation by poverty, race, limited 
English proficiency and other factors. It is essential because 
ultimately, it should be parents that are the greatest lever for strong 
accountability in schools. It is essential because of what we know 
about how children learn--that children who are the farthest behind 
make the greatest gains when their parents are part of their school 
life.
  Many schools do a very good job of involving parents in education 
reform. This bill does nothing but ensure that parents have the option 
of an independent voice in districts where schools do not do such a 
good job. If we are to educate our children, we must also educate and 
empower their parents. This legislation provides one necessary means to 
do so.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mr. Craig):
  S. 446. A bill to preserve the authority of States over water within 
their boundaries, to delegate to States the authority of Congress to 
regulate water, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the State Water 
Sovereignty Protection Act, a bill to preserve the authority of the 
States over waters within their boundaries, to delegate the authority 
of the Congress to the States to regular water, and for other purposes.
  Since 1866, Congress has recognized and deferred to the States the 
authority to allocate and administer water within their borders. The 
Supreme Court has confirmed that this is an appropriate role for the 
States. Additionally, in 1952, the Congress passed the McCarran 
amendment which provides for the adjudication of State and Federal 
Water claims in State water courts.
  However, despite both judicial and legislative edicts, I am deeply 
concerned that the administration, Federal agencies, and some in the 
Congress are setting the stage for ignoring long established statutory 
provisions concerning State water rights and State water contracts. The 
Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, the Federal Land Policy 
Management Act, and

[[Page S1786]]

wilderness designations have all been vehicles used to erode State 
sovereignty over it water.
  It is imperative that States maintain sovereignty over management and 
control of their water and water systems. All rights to water or 
reservations of rights for any purpose in States should be subject to 
the substantive and procedural laws of that State, not the Federal 
Government. To protect State water rights, I am introducing the State 
Water Sovereignty Protection Act.
  The State Water Sovereignty Protection Act provide that whenever the 
United States seeks to appropriate water or acquire a water right, it 
will be subject to State procedural and substantive water law. The Act 
further holds that States control the water within their boundaries and 
that the Federal Government may exercise management or control over 
water only in compliance with State law. Finally, in any administrative 
or judicial proceeding in which the United States participates pursuant 
to the McCarran Amendment, the United States is subject to all costs 
and fees to the same extend as costs and fees may be imposed on a 
private party.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAPO (for himself, Mr. Craig and Mr. Helms):
  S. 447. A bill to subject the United States to imposition of fees and 
costs in proceedings relating to State water rights adjudications; to 
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Water Adjudication 
Fee Fairness Act of 2001. This bill would require the federal 
government to pay the same filing fees and costs associated with state 
water rights' adjudications as is currently required of states and 
private parties.
  To establish relative rights to water--water that is the lifeblood of 
many states, particularly in the west--states must conduct lengthy, 
complicated, and expensive proceedings in water rights' adjudications. 
In 1952, Congress recognized the necessity and benefit of requiring 
federal claims to be adjudicated in these state proceedings by adopting 
the McCarran amendment. The McCarran amendment waives the sovereign 
immunity of the United States and requires the federal government to 
submit to state court jurisdiction and to file water rights' claims in 
state general adjudication proceedings.
  These federal claims are typically among the most complicated and 
largest of claims in state adjudications, and federal agencies are 
often the primary beneficiary of adjudication proceedings where states 
officially quantify and record their water rights. However, in 1992, 
the United States Supreme Court held that, under existing law, the U.S. 
need not pay fees for processing federal claims.
  When the United States does not pay a proportionate share of the 
costs associated with adjudications, the burden of funding the 
proceedings unfairly shifts to other water users and often delays 
completion of the adjudications by diminishing the resources necessary 
to complete them. Delays in completing adjudications result in the 
inability to protect private and public property interests or determine 
how much unappropriated water may remain to satisfy important 
environmental and economic development priorities.
  Additionally, because they are not subject to fees and costs like 
other water users in the adjudication, federal agencies can file 
questionable claims without facing court costs, inflating the number of 
their claims for future negotiation purposes. This creates an unlevel 
playing field favoring the federal agencies and places a further 
financial and resources burden on the system.
  For example, in the Snake River Basin adjudication, which is in Idaho 
and is probably the largest water adjudication proceeding in the 
country, the United States Forest Service filed more than 3,700 federal 
claims. The Idaho Department of Water Resources expended thousands of 
dollars giving notice to all other claimants, additionally the State of 
Idaho and private claimants spent over $800,000 preparing objections to 
the Federal Service's claims. On the eve of the objection deadline, the 
US withdrew all but 71 of the claims--the Department of Justice's 
explanation: litigation strategy.
  This example is not an isolated incident. At best, the taxpayers and 
states should not be forced to incur these costs simply because the 
agency does not take the time to seriously evaluate its claims. At 
worst, the taxpayers should not bear the brunt of the federal 
government's Machiavellian tactics.
  I recognize that the federal government has a legitimate right to 
some reserved water rights; however, the federal government should play 
by the same rules as the states and other private users. The Water 
Adjudication Fee Fairness Act is legislation that remedies this 
situation by subjecting the United States, when party to a general 
adjudication, to the same fees and costs as state and private users in 
water rights adjudications.
  This measure has the full support of the Western States Water Council 
and the Western Governor's Association. I ask my colleagues to join me 
in supporting water users, taxpayers, the states, and welcome their co-
sponsorship.
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this legislation be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 447

       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 ``Water Adjudication Fee 
     Fairness Act of 2001''.

      SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Generally, water allocation in the western United 
     States is based upon the doctrine of prior appropriation, 
     under which water users' rights are quantified under State 
     law. Appropriative rights carry designated priority dates 
     that establish the relative right of priority to use water 
     from a source. Most States in the West have developed 
     judicial and administrative proceedings, often called general 
     adjudications, to quantify and document these relative 
     rights, including the rights to water claimed by the United 
     States Government under either State or Federal law.
       (2) State general adjudications are typically complicated, 
     expensive civil court and administrative actions that can 
     involve hundreds or even thousands of claimants. Such 
     adjudications give certainty to water rights, provide 
     direction for water administration, and reduce conflict over 
     water allocation and water usage. Those claiming and 
     establishing rights to water are the primary beneficiaries of 
     State general adjudication proceedings.
       (3) The Congress has recognized the benefits of the State 
     general adjudication system, and by enactment of section 208 
     of the Department of Justice Appropriation Act, 1953 (43 
     U.S.C. 666; popularly known as the ``McCarran Amendment''), 
     required the United States to submit to State court 
     jurisdiction and to file claims in State general adjudication 
     proceedings.
       (4) Water rights claims by Federal agencies under either 
     State or Federal law are often the largest or most complex 
     claims in State general adjudications. However, the United 
     States Supreme Court, in the case United States v. Idaho, 508 
     U.S. 1 (1992), determined that the McCarran Amendment does 
     not require the United States to pay some filing fees simply 
     because they were misconstrued or perceived to be the same as 
     costs taxed against all parties.
       (5) Since Federal agency water rights claims are among the 
     most difficult to adjudicate, and since the United States is 
     not required to pay some fees and costs paid by non-Federal 
     claimants, the burden of funding adjudication proceedings 
     unfairly shifts to private water users and State taxpayers.
       (6) The lack of Federal Government funding to support State 
     water rights adjudications in relation to the complexity of 
     the claims involved has produced significant delays in 
     completion of many State general adjudications. These delays 
     inhibit the ability of both the States and Federal agencies 
     to protect private and public property interests. Also, 
     failure to complete the final adjudication of claims to water 
     restricts the ability of resource managers to determine how 
     much unappropriated water is available to satisfy 
     environmental and economic development demands.

     SEC. 3. LIABILITY OF UNITED STATES FOR FEES AND COSTS IN 
                   WATER USE RIGHTS PROCEEDINGS.

       (a) In General.--In any State administrative or judicial 
     proceeding for the adjudication or administration of rights 
     to the use of water in which the United States is a party, 
     the United States shall be subject to the imposition of fees 
     and costs on its claims to water rights under either State or 
     Federal law to the same extent as a private party to the 
     proceeding.
       (b) Application.--Subsection (a) shall apply to proceedings 
     pending on or initiated after the date of enactment of this 
     Act, including with respect to fees and costs imposed in such 
     a proceeding before the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (c) Report to Congress.--The head of any Federal agency 
     that files or has pending any

[[Page S1787]]

     water rights claim shall prepare and submit to the Congress, 
     within 90 days after the end of each fiscal year, a report 
     that identifies--
       (1) each such claim filed by the agency that has not yet 
     been decreed;
       (2) all fees and costs imposed on the United States for 
     each claim identified under paragraph (1);
       (3) any portion of such fees and costs that has not been 
     paid; and
       (4) the source of funds used to pay such fees and costs.
       (d) Fees and Costs Defined.--In this section, the term 
     ``fees and costs'' means any administrative fee, 
     administrative cost, claim fee, judicial fee, or judicial 
     cost imposed by a State on a party claiming a right to the 
     use of water under either State or Federal law in a State 
     proceeding referred to in subsection (a).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 448. A bill to provide permanent appropriations to the Radiation 
Exposure Compensation Trust Fund to make payments under the Radiation 
Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210 note); to the Committee on 
Appropriations.
  S. 449. A bill to ensure the timely payment of benefits to eligible 
persons under the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (42 U.S.C. 2210); 
to the Committee on Appropriations.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce two bills that 
will provide full funding for the Radiation Exposure Compensation Trust 
Fund.
  One of the unfortunate consequences of our country's rapid 
development of its nuclear weapons programs was that many of those who 
worked in the early uranium mines became afflicted with debilitating 
and too often deadly diseases, including various cancers and 
respiratory illnesses.
  These miners and their families lived under tough conditions. Some 
lived in one-room houses located as close as 200 feet from the mine 
shafts. Their children played near the mines and their families drank 
underground water that exposed them to radiation. The miners endured 
long, uncomfortable days many feet underground.
  One such miner was Paul Hicks, for whom this bill is named. Mr. Hicks 
of Grants, NM was a uranium miner for twelve years in New Mexico. He 
later worked as lead miner, a shift boss, and ended his career as a 
mine foreman. Paul was the President of the New Mexico Uranium Miners 
Council and he championed the fight on behalf of miners of the Najavo 
Nation, Acoma Pueblo, Grants, NM, Dove Creek, and Grand Junction, CO. 
Unfortunately, Paul passed away from bone cancer last year.
  Although Paul is no longer with us, his voice on behalf of uranium 
miners will forever be heard. As long as I'm in the United States 
Senate I will carry his torch until justice for all uranium miners is 
realized.
  Paul was not alone in his suffering. Other New Mexico uranium miners 
have been stricken by radiation-related diseases. Indeed, many of these 
miners were Native Americans--primarily from the Najavo Nation. As many 
as 1,500 Navajos worked in the uranium mines from 1947-1971.
  To these Americans, the Federal government owes a special duty of 
care. The government has a longstanding trust relationship with Native 
Americans based on treaties and agreements. I regret to say that as for 
the Najavo miners our government has failed miserably in protecting 
this trust relationship.

  After all, these Native American miners and all uranium miners helped 
build our nuclear arsenal--the arsenal that is, at least in part, 
responsible for ending the Cold War. Our nation owes them a debt of 
gratitude. Yet, despite their enormous sacrifice, the federal 
government failed to protect their health. The government had adequate 
warning about the radiation hazards associated with uranium mining. 
Nonetheless, prior to federal regulations in 1971, the miners were sent 
into poorly ventilated mines with almost no warnings about the dangers 
of radiation.
  After a 13-year fight we finally passed legislation to rectify this 
injustice in 1990. The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act was intended 
to provide fair and swift compensation for those miners, federal 
workers, and downwinders who had contracted certain radiation-related 
illnesses.
  Since 1990, more than 3500 claims have been paid by the federal 
government under RECA. However, by mid-2000 the fund had run dry.
  The bottom line is that there is not enough money for the RECA trust 
fund. In fact, the Justice Department, who administers this program, 
has been sending IOU's to individuals who have already been approved 
for benefits.
  Frankly, this is unconscionable. Those who helped protect our 
nation's security through their work on our nuclear programs must be 
compensated for the enormous price they paid. Anything less is 
unacceptable.
  Senator Hatch and I propose a bill seeking $84 million in emergency 
supplemental appropriations to pay those claims that have already been 
approved as well as the projected number of approved claims for FY 
2001. We are also introducing legislation to make all future payments 
for approved claims mandatory.
  With this legislation, we will ensure that those who gave so much for 
our nation will at least receive their deserved benefits. We must never 
again let their sacrifice go unanswered.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a Department of Justice 
IOU letter be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                            Department of Justice,


                                               Civil Division,

                                                   Washington, DC.
     Re RECA Claim No. 201
     Claimant: ------ ------
       Dear Mr. ------ ------. I am pleased to inform you that 
     your claim for compensation under the Radiation Exposure 
     Compensation Act has been approved. Regretfully, because the 
     money available to pay claims has been exhausted, we are 
     unable to send a compensation payment to you at this time. 
     When Congress provides additional funds, we will contact you 
     to commence the payment process.
       Thank you for your understanding.
           Sincerely,

                                            Gerard W. Fischer,

                                               Assistant Director,
                                     Torts Branch, Civil Division.

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, today I am joining with my esteemed 
colleague and chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Domenici, in 
introducing two pieces of legislation that will ensure the full funding 
of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, RECA, Trust Fund.
  As the original sponsor of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act of 
1990 and the subsequent amendments to the Act, S. 1515 which was 
enacted last year, I am pleased that this program has provided much 
needed compassionate compensation to thousands of individuals. And, 
although many RECA eligible individuals have received compensation, it 
is now apparent that a funding shortfall exists within the program 
resulting in hundreds of individuals not receiving their payments.
  The legislation Senator Domenici and I are introducing today is 
designed to meet the funding shortfall so that all eligible individuals 
who are approved for compensation will receive their payment and not an 
``IOU'' from the Justice Department.
  The first bill ensures the timely payment of benefits to eligible 
persons by providing $84 million to the RECA Trust Fund for fiscal year 
2001. The money will be available to the Justice Department to fund the 
existing claims that have already been processed as well as anticipated 
claims of the remainder of this fiscal year.
  The second bill provides for a permanent appropriation to the RECA 
Trust Fund beginning in fiscal year 2002, and thereafter, such sums as 
may be necessary to meet the financial obligations of approved claims.
  Both of these bills are needed in order to pay those individuals who 
have qualified under the original 1990 Act and the RECA 2000 
amendments, as signed into law last July 10, 2000, but who have not 
received their payment because the fund is currently depleted. 
Moreover, as a result of the passage of RECA 2000, we have extended 
compensation to additional deserving citizens who have suffered 
mightily as a result of the cold war atomic testing programs.
  In addition, the legislation we are introducing today provides that 
funding for the RECA trust fund be made through a permanent 
appropriation. This provision will provide certainty and stability in 
financing the trust fund and, thereby, ensure eligible individuals 
receive their compensation.
  I want to thank my colleague, Senator Domenici, for his commitment to

[[Page S1788]]

resolving this very difficult problem that many individuals are now 
facing. It is simply unfair for the federal government to promise 
compensation to harmed individuals and then tell these same people that 
there are no federal dollars to pay their claims. This situation is 
completely unacceptable.
  I would also like to add, in this context, that within the next few 
weeks I will be introducing additional legislation that will not only 
complement the bills introduced today but also provide for necessary 
refinements and technical changes to improve the administration of the 
RECA program. I will have more to say about this legislation when it is 
introduced within the next several weeks.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting these important 
measures.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NELSON of Florida:
  S. 450. A bill to amend the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to provide for 
enhanced protection of nonpublic personal information, including health 
information, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, 
Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  S. 451. A bill to establish civil and criminal penalties for the sale 
or purchase of a social security number; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to express my 
grave concern about the administration's decision that apparently 
favors the interests of big insurance companies over the health privacy 
rights of Americans.
  I was dismayed to learn on Tuesday that the Secretary of Health and 
Human Services prevented new medical privacy rules from coming into 
effect. In essence, these rules would have prevented doctors and 
insurers from sharing private medical information about their patients.
  The delay ostensibly is to allow further discussion. But it makes no 
sense. The rules have been debated in Washington for nearly 10 years. 
The Secretary's decision was unfortunate. There are no acceptable 
excuses for their delay. Consumers deserve to have their personally 
identifiable information protected from prying eyes.
  I promised the people of my State in the course of the last 6 to 8 
months of the discussion in the course of the campaign that I would 
make protecting their privacy one of my top priorities, because too 
often these days, personally identifiable medical and financial 
information is being shared, bought, or sold, and it is being done 
without the consent of the consumer. This practice must stop. It is our 
job to pass legislation that will stop it.
  Today, I am going to be introducing two bills that begin to address 
aspects of the privacy crisis. Both bills build upon the undeniable 
principle that information gathered for one purpose should never be 
disclosed, made available, or otherwise used for another purpose 
without the consumer's consent.
  Clearly, we should be able to share information with our doctor that 
we don't want revealed to other people, particularly an employer or a 
money lender. I am going to work hard to try to pass these privacy 
protections for every American.
  The first bill prohibits banks and financial institutions from 
selling or sharing private customer information. I strongly believe 
that financial institutions should not be allowed to pass along 
confidential customer, financial, or medical information to affiliates, 
business partners, or others who wish to turn a profit from an 
individual's personal data.
  I have a little bit of background in this because 6 years ago, when I 
had the privilege of being the elected insurance commissioner of the 
State of Florida, there was a case in front of the U.S. Supreme Court 
entitled Barnett Banks v. Bill Nelson, in my capacity as insurance 
commissioner. The issue was on a technical question of a 1916 Federal 
law as to whether or not banks could sell insurance. The Court ruled, 
on the basis of that law, that it pertained to the business of 
insurance, the upshot of which was that banks could sell insurance. In 
our argument, we noted that if that occurred, there was always the 
possibility that you had to protect against coercion and protect 
against privacy rights being invaded.
  As a result of that unanimous Supreme Court decision, Congress then, 
in 1999, enacted the Financial Services Modernization Act. In the 11th 
hour of the closing of the session in October, the promise was made 
that, if you can pass this bill now, we will come back next year--the 
year 2000--and enact the privacy protections. That promise was not 
fulfilled in the year 2000.

  For under the present condition of the law, there is a gaping 
loophole on privacy protection. In an era of mergers, under the new 
law, banks can now join with insurance companies and then evaluate the 
medical information of their affiliates' policyholders before deciding 
whether or not to issue a loan.
  What my legislation will do is require the express written consent of 
the consumer before any personally identifiable medical information can 
be shared or sold, and the express consent of the consumer before any 
personally identifiable financial information can be shared or sold.
  For the consumer, privacy should always be the assumption. To prevent 
coercion, this legislation I am introducing prohibits banks and 
financial companies from denying service to customers who refuse to 
consent to the sale of their personally identifiable financial and 
medical information. To make sure financial institutions take this law 
seriously, under the legislation, officers of the company can incur 
personal liability for failing to comply.
  This is a serious problem: the invasion of our privacy under the 
current condition of the law. It demands a serious remedy. I am going 
to be encouraging all of our colleagues to join with me and fulfill the 
promise that the Congress made in 1999 in the enactment of the 
Financial Services Modernization Act by plugging this gaping loophole 
where there is no privacy protection.
  There is a second bill that I am introducing today. It makes the 
selling or purchasing of an individual's Social Security number a 
Federal crime. Social Security numbers are often the key to unlocking 
vast stores of personal information, both in the private sector and the 
Federal Government. If there is any personal identification number, it 
is the Social Security number. We look all around us and we see that 
identity theft has grown at an alarming rate during the past decade--in 
many cases, through the Social Security number abuse.
  My goodness, we have heard of credit cards being established in 
somebody else's name by the theft of their Social Security number and 
running up huge bills. We have heard these stories over and over, and 
even the confusion caused by identity theft, where crimes are reported 
to be attributed to an individual who does not have anything to do with 
it.
  When a Social Security number falls into the wrong hands, tremendous 
financial and personal damage can be incurred. To tackle this terrible 
problem, this legislation that I am introducing today establishes 
criminal and monetary penalties. The bill creates both prison terms and 
fines of up to $100,000 for buying or selling Social Security numbers.
  I hope in this field of privacy protection that the Senate is going 
to ultimately fulfill the promise that it made 2 years ago and move 
quickly in this session to protect the privacy of our American 
citizens.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of both bills be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bills were ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 450

       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 ``Financial Institution 
     Privacy Protection Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. PROTECTION OF PRIVATE HEALTH INFORMATION.

       Section 509(4) of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. 
     6809(4)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) The term `nonpublic personal information' includes 
     health information, defined as any information, including 
     genetic information, demographic information, and tissue 
     samples collected from an individual, whether oral or 
     recorded in any form or medium--
       ``(i) that is created or received by a health care 
     provider, health researcher, health plan, health oversight 
     agency, public health authority, employer, health or life 
     insurer, school or university; and
       ``(ii) that --
       ``(I) relates to the past, present, or future physical or 
     mental health or condition of an individual (including 
     individual cells and their components), the provision of 
     health

[[Page S1789]]

     care to an individual, or the past, present, or future 
     payment for the provision of health care to an individual; 
     and
       ``(II) that identifies an individual, or with respect to 
     which there is a reasonable basis to believe that the 
     information can be used to identify an individual.''.

     SEC. 3. OPT-IN FOR SHARING OF INFORMATION.

       Section 502 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. 6802) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by inserting ``any affiliate or'' before ``a 
     nonaffiliated'';
       (B) by striking ``unless such'' and inserting the 
     following: ``unless--
       ``(1) the institution provides''; and
       (C) by striking the period at the end and inserting the 
     following: ``; and
       ``(2) the consumer to whom the information pertains--
       ``(A) has affirmatively consented (in writing, in the case 
     of health information, as defined in section 509(4)(D)), in 
     accordance with rules prescribed under section 504, to the 
     disclosure of such information; and
       ``(B) has not withdrawn such consent.''; and
       (2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Denial of Service Prohibited.--A financial 
     institution may not deny a financial product or a financial 
     service to any consumer based on the refusal by the consumer 
     to grant the consent required by this section.''.

     SEC. 4. COMPLIANCE OFFICERS.

       Section 503 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. 6803) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Compliance Officers.--Each financial institution 
     shall designate a privacy compliance officer, who shall be 
     responsible for ensuring compliance by the institution with 
     the requirements of this title and the privacy policies of 
     the institution.''.

     SEC. 5. LIABILITY.

       Section 505 of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15 U.S.C. 6805) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Civil Penalties.--The Attorney General of the United 
     States may bring a civil action in the appropriate district 
     court of the United States against any financial institution 
     that engages in conduct constituting a violation of this 
     title, and, upon proof of such violation--
       ``(1) the financial institution shall be subject to a civil 
     penalty of not more than $100,000 for each such violation; 
     and
       ``(2) the officers and directors of the financial 
     institution shall be subject to, and shall be personally 
     liable for, a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 for each 
     such violation.''.
                                  ____


                                 S. 451

       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 ``Social Security Number 
     Protection Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF THE SALE OR PURCHASE OF A SOCIAL 
                   SECURITY NUMBER.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Purchase.--The term ``purchase'' means providing 
     directly or indirectly, anything of value in exchange for a 
     social security number.
       (2) Sale.--The term ``sale'' means obtaining, directly or 
     indirectly, anything of value in exchange for a social 
     security number.
       (3) Social security number.--The term ``social security 
     number'' has the meaning given that term in section 208(c) of 
     the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 408(c)), and includes a 
     social security account number (as defined in such section) 
     and any identifying portion or derivative of such a number.
       (b) Prohibition of the Sale or Purchase of a Social 
     Security Number.--No person may sell or purchase a social 
     security number.
       (c) Civil Money Penalties.--
       (1) In general.--Any person who the Attorney General 
     determines has violated subsection (b) shall be subject, in 
     addition to any other penalties that may be prescribed by 
     law, to a civil money penalty of not more than--
       (A) in the case of an individual, $10,000 for each such 
     violation; and
       (B) in the case of any other person, $100,000 for each such 
     violation.
       (2) Enforcement procedures.--The provisions of section 
     1128A of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1320a-7a) (other 
     than subsections (a), (b), (f), (h), (i), (j), and (m), and 
     the first sentence of subsection (c)), and the provisions of 
     subsections (d) and (e) of section 205 of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 405), shall apply to a civil money penalty 
     imposed under this subsection in the same manner as such 
     provisions apply, respectively, to a penalty or proceeding 
     under section 1128A(a) of that Act or to a hearing, 
     investigation, or other proceeding authorized or directed 
     under title II of that Act, except that, for purposes of this 
     paragraph, any reference in section 1128A of that Act to 
     ``the Secretary'' and any reference in section 205 of that 
     Act to ``the Commissioner of Social Security'' shall be 
     deemed to be a reference to the ``Attorney General''.
       (d) Criminal Sanctions.--Section 208(a) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 408(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (8), by inserting ``or'' after the 
     semicolon; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (8) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(9) knowingly and willfully sells or purchases (as such 
     terms are defined in section 2(a) of the Social Security 
     Number Protection Act of 2001) a social security number (as 
     defined in subsection (c));''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NICKLES (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Bond, and Mr. 
        Hutchinson):
  S.J. Res. 6. A joint resolution providing for congressional 
disapproval of the rule submitted by the Department of Labor under 
chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, relating to ergonomics; to 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.

                              S.J. Res. 6

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     disapproves the rule submitted by the Department of Labor 
     relating to ergonomics (published at 65 Fed. Reg. 68261 
     (2000)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.

                          ____________________