[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 49 (Thursday, April 5, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3532-S3554]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mr. Warner, Mr. Helms, Mr. Specter, 
        Mr. Brownback, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr. Hutchinson):
  S. 702. A bill for the relief of Gao Zhan; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation on behalf 
of myself, Senators Warner, Helms, Specter, Brownback, Feinstein and 
Tim Hutchinson. This bill will grant citizenship to a Chinese woman, 
Gao Zhan, who has been living in Virginia and is a researcher at 
American University.
  Early this year, Gao Zhan, her husband, Dong Hua Xue and their 5-
year-old son, Andrew, went to the People's Republic of China to visit 
the parents of Gao Zhan and Dong Hua. On February 11, 2001, Gao, Dong 
Hua, and Andrew were detained as they were leaving the People's 
Republic of China. They were separated, blindfolded and taken 
incommunicado to unknown locations.
  After 26 days of separated detention, Chinese authorities released 
Dong Hua and Andrew. Dong Hua and Andrew returned to their home in 
Virginia. Gao Zhan has remained in a Chinese prison. We do not know 
where she is and no one has been permitted to visit her.
  The U.S. Department of State has made over a dozen protests to the 
government of the People's Republic of China about this matter but the 
government of the People's Republic of China has refused to permit 
access to Gao Zhan.
  The requirements to become a U.S. citizen are: Establishing residency 
for five years prior to application; Passing the INS test on U.S. 
history, government and language; Passing the FBI background 
investigation; and Taking the oath of renunciation and allegiance.
  Gao Zhan and her husband, Dong Hua, have been permanent resident 
aliens of the United States since September 28, 1993. They filed 
applications to become citizens on August 3, 1998. Their applications 
to become citizens were granted on November 24, 1999. The only step 
that remained before they could become citizens was to take their oath 
of renunciation and allegiance.
  Gao Zhan and Dong Hua had completed the first three of these 
requirements before they visited the People's Republic of China. Last 
Friday, March 30, Dong Hua took his oath of renunciation and 
allegiance.
  This legislation would permit Gao Zhan to become a U.S. citizen 
without her having to take the oath. In addition, the legislation 
provides that the Attorney General may deliver the certificate 
indicating that Gao Zhan is a citizen to her husband if it cannot be 
delivered personally to her.
  This bill will be referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration of the 
Senate Committee on the Judiciary. I have spoken with Senator 
Brownback, chairman of the Subcommittee, as well as Senator Feinstein 
ranking member, and Senator Hatch, chairman of the full Committee, and 
urged them to move this bill as rapidly as possible.
  The first step that will be taken by the Subcommittee on Immigration 
is to request a report on this case from the Immigration and 
Naturalization Service, INS, which will provide the Subcommittee with a 
factual record from which to operate. I have been told that this report 
may take about two weeks to prepare.
  When the Deputy Prime Minister of the People's Republic of China 
visited the United States last month, President Bush raised the issue 
of Gao Zhan's continued detention and the refusal to permit officials 
of the U.S. government to visit her.
  Secretary of State Colin Powell recently called for the release of 
Gao Zhan on humanitarian grounds and criticized the People's Republic 
of China for holding Andrew, Gao Zhan's 5 year old son and a U.S. 
citizen, without notifying our Embassy in Beijing as required by 
treaty.
  It has been reported that this past Tuesday, the People's Republic of 
China formally accused Gao Zhan of ``accepting money from a foreign 
intelligence agency and participating in espionage activities in 
China.'' If Gao Zhan is tried on this charge, she is likely to be 
convicted and given a long prison sentence. China tries such security 
cases in secret and allows little chance for defendants to respond to 
the charges.
  I hope the introduction of this bill and its consideration by the 
Congress

[[Page S3533]]

will improve Gao Zhan's conditions in the People's Republic of China, 
afford her protections and rights that she doesn't currently have as a 
permanent resident alien and hopefully lead to her release. I ask 
unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 702

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

     SECTION 1. NATURALIZATION OF GAO ZHAN.

       (a) Naturalization.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Attorney General shall naturalize Gao Zhan as a 
     citizen of the United States, without her being administered 
     the oath of renunciation and allegiance pursuant to section 
     337(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
     1448(a)), not later than 5 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
       (b) Certificate of Naturalization.--Not later than 5 days 
     after the date of naturalization under paragraph (1), an 
     appropriate official of the United States Government 
     designated by the Attorney General shall deliver to Gao Zhan 
     a certificate of naturalization prepared by the Attorney 
     General. If the Attorney General determines that delivery of 
     the certificate of naturalization cannot be made within the 
     period specified, the Attorney shall furnish the certificate 
     to Gao Zhan's spouse, Xue Donghua, on her behalf.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
        Jeffords, Mr. Gregg, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Kennedy, and 
        Mr. Kerry):
  S. 703. A bill to extend the effective period of the consent of 
Congress to the interstate compact relating to the restoration of 
Atlantic salmon to the Connecticut River Basin and creating the 
Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. SMITH of New Hampshire. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce 
a bill to extend the authorization of the Connecticut River Atlantic 
Salmon Commission, CRASC, for an additional 20 years.
  CRASC is a cooperative effort that includes multiple state and 
federal agencies, conservation organizations, industry and citizens 
throughout the Connecticut River basin. It was initially recognized by 
Congress in 1983. For the past twenty years, the Commission has been 
working to restore Atlantic salmon and other anadromous fish 
populations in the Connecticut River watershed.
  The Connecticut River basin runs through the states of New Hampshire, 
Vermont, Massachusetts and Connecticut. The native Atlantic salmon 
stocks declined through the 18th century, and disappeared from the 
Connecticut River and its tributaries in the 1800s. Since 1983, CRASC 
has been successful in reintroducing the Atlantic salmon throughout the 
watershed.
  The success of the CRASC is due to the cooperative nature in which it 
runs. Without the support of all the stakeholders, the restoration 
efforts would be slower and more difficult. Restoration efforts include 
the construction and maintenance of fish passage systems; salmon 
hatcheries and reintroduction; habitat restoration; research, 
monitoring and evaluation; and education and public outreach. The 
health of the salmon population is directly related to the quality of 
the river, and without these efforts, the two million people who live 
in the basin would be unable to enjoy the benefits that can be derived 
from a cleaner, healthier river system.
  The legislation that I am introducing does two basic things. First, 
it reauthorizes the Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission for 
another twenty years. Second, the bill authorizes $9 million in 
appropriations to the Secretary of the Interior through 2010 to carry 
out Atlantic salmon and anadromous fish restoration activities. The 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service provides the Commission with just over 
half of its annual expenditures; however, the level of funding has not 
kept pace with needs. This authorization level would provide $5 million 
a year to federal and state agencies for operations and maintenance 
needs, and $4 million a year for construction and capital improvement 
needs for the hatcheries and fish passage systems.
  The Connecticut River Atlantic Salmon Commission is the perfect 
example of federal and state agencies and the public working together 
to conserve our natural resources. In the past twenty years, this 
cooperative approach to conservation has resulted in the successful 
conservation of anadromous fish populations throughout the Connecticut 
River basin, as well as the improvement in the quality of the river and 
its tributaries. This kind of effort deserves the continued support of 
Congress.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CAMPBELL:
  S. 704. A bill to prohibit the cloning of humans; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to 
prohibit the cloning of human beings. This bill, which is similar to 
the bill I introduced in 1998, would be an outright ban on human 
cloning, whether publicly or privately funded.
  My bill intends to prohibit human reproductive cloning in a 
comprehensive manner. It includes a ban on the use of human and animal 
tissues for the purpose of creating a cloned human child. However, this 
bill does not address the prohibition of embryo cloning, nor does this 
bill extend to cloning technologies for animals or plants.
  Though an executive order in 1997 banned the use of federal money for 
any project involving the cloning of humans, no law limits such 
research with private funds. And, though the Food and Drug 
Administration has declared its authority to regulate human cloning, we 
have very recently heard testimony before a House subcommittee stating 
that several research groups are moving ahead in their experiments 
without such approval.
  In addition to the moral dilemma this process presents, a recent 
Time/CNN poll shows 90 percent of the respondents think it is a bad 
idea to clone human beings. And, as a nation, we are not alone in 
rejecting both the notion and the practice of altering creation. There 
is broad international agreement that the cloning of human beings for 
reproductive purposes should be prohibited.
  I am not a scientist and do not wish to insert myself in the process 
of scientific research and the advances from that research from which 
we all benefit. However, when science and technology cross over the 
boundary of what is ethically and morally appropriate, I believe I have 
an obligation to respond on behalf of myself and my constituents. 
Congress, and its law-making authority, is the only mechanism available 
to assert the will of the American people that human cloning not go 
forward.
  I believe now is the time to enact an immediate ban on such efforts 
before this research opens doors we will never be able to close.
  I urge my colleagues to take swift action to impose a ban on human 
cloning. In doing so, we must ensure that the prohibition is 
comprehensive, and covers all possible techniques in this rapidly 
advancing field. We are all aware of the announced efforts to move 
forward with human cloning experiments so we must act quickly. I urge 
my colleagues to work together so we can pass a bill to prevent these 
and future efforts to clone humans.
  I thank the chair and 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. 704

       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 ``Human Cloning Prohibition 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Human cloning procedure.--The term ``human cloning 
     procedure'' means--
       (A) the use of somatic cell nuclear transfer or any other 
     cloning technique for the purpose of initiating or attempting 
     to initiate a human pregnancy;
       (B) the implantation of a conceptus, blastocyst, or embryo 
     created through somatic cell nuclear transfer into a 
     mammalian uterus; or
       (C) the creation of genetically identical siblings by 
     dividing a conceptus, blastocyst, or embryo for the purpose 
     of initiating or attempting to initiate a human pregnancy.
       (2) Egg.--The term ``egg'' means a mature female germ cell 
     of any species.
       (3) Oocyte.--The term ``oocyte'' means an immature female 
     germ cell of any species.

[[Page S3534]]

       (4) Person.--The term ``person'' includes any individual, 
     partnership, firm, joint stock company, corporation, 
     association, trust, estate, or other legal entity.
       (5) Somatic cell.--The term ``somatic cell'' means any 
     diploid cell of the human organism, including a cell of a 
     conceptus, embryo, fetus, child, or adult, not existing as a 
     haploid germ cell.
       (6) Somatic cell nuclear transfer.--The term ``somatic cell 
     nuclear transfer'' means transferring the nucleus of a human 
     somatic cell into an oocyte or egg from which the nucleus has 
     been removed or rendered inert.

     SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON HUMAN CLONING.

       (a) In General.--It shall be unlawful for any person to 
     engage in a human cloning procedure.
       (b) Federal Funds.--No Federal funds may be obligated or 
     expended to conduct or support any research the purpose of 
     which is to engage in a human cloning procedure.

     SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) Civil Penalties.--Any person found to be in violation 
     of section 3 shall be subject to a civil penalty of not more 
     than $10,000,000 for each such violation.
       (b) Ineligibility for Federal Funds.--An individual found 
     to be in violation of section 3 shall not be eligible to 
     receive any Federal funding for any research for a period of 
     15 years after such violation.
       (c) Criminal Penalty.--Any person who is convicted of 
     violating any provision of section 3 shall be fined according 
     to the provisions of title 18, United States Code, or 
     sentenced to up to 10 years in prison, or both.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Daschle, Mrs. 
        Hutchison, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Reid, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Johnson, Mr. 
        Schumer, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Torricelli, Mr. Inouye, 
        Mr. Reed, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Sarbanes, 
        Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Lincoln, and 
        Ms. Snowe.
  S. 706. A bill to amend the Social Security Act to establish programs 
to alleviate the nursing profession shortage, and for other purposes; 
to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleague Senator 
Jeffords in introducing the Nurse Reinvestment Act. This legislation 
will increase the number of nurses in our country, and also ensure that 
every nurse in the field has the skills he or she needs to provide the 
quality care patients deserve.
  We are in the midst of a serious nursing workforce shortage. Every 
type of community, urban, suburban and rural, is touched by it. No 
sector of our health care system is immune to it. Across the country, 
hospitals, nursing homes, home health care agencies and hospices are 
struggling to find nurses to care for their patients. Patients in 
search of care have been denied admission to facilities and told that 
there were ``no beds'' for them. Often there are beds, just not the 
nurses to care for the patients who would occupy them.
  Our Nation has suffered from nursing shortages in the past. However, 
this shortage is particularly severe because we are losing nurses at 
both ends of the pipeline. Over the past five years, enrollment in 
entry-level nursing programs has declined by 20 percent. Lured to the 
lucrative jobs of the new economy, high school graduates are not 
pursuing careers in nursing in the numbers they once had. Consequently, 
nurses under the age of 30 represent only 10 percent of the current 
workforce. By 2010, 40 percent of the nursing workforce will be over 
the age of 50, and nearing retirement. If these trends are not 
reversed, we stand to lose vast numbers of nurses at the same time that 
they will be needed to care for the millions of baby boomers enrolling 
in Medicare.
  The Nurse Reinvestment Act will support the recruitment of new 
students into our nation's nursing programs. The bill will fund 
national and local public service announcements to enhance the profile 
of the nursing profession and encourage students to commit to a career 
in nursing. Our legislation will also expand school-to-career 
partnerships between health care facilities, nursing colleges, middle 
schools and high schools to show our youth the value of a nursing 
degree.
  Our legislation will ensure that barriers to higher education do not 
dissuade Americans who are interested in nursing from pursuing a degree 
in the field. The Nurse Reinvestment Act will support remedial 
education for students who need help getting-up to speed on math, 
science and medical English. Our legislation will also ensure that 
there is support for single moms and dads with children who need a hand 
in daycare or a lift in getting to their classroom because they are 
without transportation.
  In addition to recruiting new nurses, our legislation will reinvest 
in nurses who are already practicing by providing them with education 
and training at every step of the career ladder and at every health 
care facility in which they work. It will ensure that nurses can obtain 
advanced degrees, from a B.S. in Nursing to a PhD in Nursing. It will 
enable nurses to access the specialty training they require to learn 
how to treat a specific disease or utilize a new piece of technology. 
Our bill will also help colleges and universities develop curriculum in 
gerontology and long-term care so that nursing students can pursue 
concentrations, minors and majors in this growing field of health care 
and be ready to apply their knowledge to the current and future senior 
population.
  To assist institutions in providing advanced education and training 
for nurses across the career ladder, our bill will strengthen the 
partnerships between colleges of nursing and health care facilities. 
Grants will be available to support such initiatives as the teaching of 
a courses in gerontology in the conference rooms of a hospital or 
nursing home. Grants will also support the use of distance learning 
technology to extend education and training to rural areas, and 
specialty education and training to all areas.
  The Nurse Reinvestment Act will authorize, for the first time in 
history, a National Nurse Service Corps. Separate from, though modeled 
after, the National Health Service Corps, the NNSC will administer 
scholarships to students who commit to working in a health care 
facility that is experiencing a shortage of nurses. In urban, suburban 
and rural communities across the country, where facilities turn away 
patients due to staff shortages, the NNSC will send qualified nurses to 
serve and provide the care that patients deserve.
  Our legislation will place nursing students in hospital-based 
programs on equal footing with medical students by enabling those 
nurses to obtain training in community health centers, federally 
qualified health centers and rural health clinics. To support nurse 
education and training in non-hospital-based programs, which are not 
eligible to bill Medicare for their training expenses, our bill 
establishes a Dedicated Fund for Clinical Nurse Education. Home health 
care agencies and hospices would be able to draw from the fund to 
establish new or upgrade old training programs. Finally, the Nurse 
Reinvestment Act will reauthorize the 1987 Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act's enhanced federal Medicaid match for clinical nurse 
education and training in nursing homes. Under our bill, states will be 
eligible to receive an enhanced federal match of 90 percent for the 
costs of nurse education and training in nursing homes.
  Our country boasts the best health care system in the world. But, 
that health care system is being jeopardized by the shortage plaguing 
our nursing workforce. Indeed, state-of-the-art medical facilities are 
of no use if their beds go unfilled and their floors remain empty 
because the nurses needed to staff them are not available. The Nurse 
Reinvestment Act not only seeks to increase the numbers of new nurses 
in our country, but also ensures that all nurses have the skills they 
need to provide the high quality care that makes our health care system 
the best in the world.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, in response to the nursing shortage, I 
am joining Senators Kerry, Hutchinson, Daschle, and other in 
introducing the Nurse Reinvestment Act. Our legislation increases the 
number of qualified individuals entering the nursing profession and 
provides them with the skills they need to provide care in the twenty-
first century.
  We are facing a looming crisis. There is a need to encourage more 
dedicated Americans to enter the profession, and to support them once 
they are there. All facets of the health care system will have a role 
to play in ensuring a strong nursing workforce. Nurses, physicians, 
hospitals, nursing homes, academia, community organizations and state 
and federal governments all must accept responsibility and work towards 
a solution.

[[Page S3535]]

  Yet, the size of our nursing workforce is remaining stagnant, while 
its average age is increasing rapidly. In 1980, 53 percent of all 
nurses were under the age of 40. In 2000 that percentage dropped to 32 
percent. In Vermont the numbers are even lower, where only 28 percent 
of nurses are under the age of 40.
  The major medical advances of the nineteenth century were in the area 
of public health. The world population growing exponentially as we 
expanded access to clean water, sanitary environments, and 
immunization. Later, driven by numerous wars, the twentieth century saw 
advances in surgery and clinical care for specific conditions. 
Likewise, pharmaceutical therapies have improved our ability to cure or 
manage hundreds of diseases and conditions. All of these developments 
mean that more of us are living, and we are living longer.
  This leads us to the twenty-first century, where I believe we will 
face the challenge of providing quality long-term care to the very 
elderly and the chronically ill. We know the population of people over 
the age of 85 is growing and we know the ``Baby-boom'' generation is 
approaching retirement. Much of the care for this population will need 
to be provided by a skilled nursing workforce.
  I would now like to enumerate some of the ways in which the Nurse 
Reinvestment Act expands and improves the federal government's support 
of ``pipeline'' programs which maintain a strong talent pool and 
develop a workforce that can address the increasingly diverse needs of 
America's population.
  First and foremost, our legislation creates a National Nursing 
Service Corps that provides scholarships to nursing schools in exchange 
for a commitment to serve two years in a health facility determined to 
have a critical shortage of nurses. We have developed this scholarship 
program to mirror the current Nursing Loan Repayment Program, and we 
specify that these nursing scholarships shall be qualified as non-
taxable income.
  The Act authorizes two new grant programs under the Health Resources 
and Service Administration's Division of Nursing. The first program, 
Initiatives to Combat Nursing Shortages, develops national, state, and 
local public service announcements to enhance the profile of nursing. 
It conducts outreach at primary and secondary schools, and provides 
appropriate student support services to individuals from disadvantaged 
backgrounds.
  The second grant program, Initiatives to Strengthen the Nursing 
Workforce, provides financial incentives for the pursuit of additional 
education across the nursing career ladder. It also helps schools 
develop curriculums in gerontology, and establishes distance learning 
partnerships between schools and providers to improve access to care in 
underserved communities. Such measures recognize the changes in the 
delivery of care that nurses will face in the coming decades.
  Finally, the Nurse Reinvestment Act expands and adjusts the Medicare 
payments for clinical nurse education to reimburse qualified hospitals 
for the costs of training nurses in hospital-affiliated provider sites, 
such as federally qualified community health centers, rural health 
clinics, nursing homes, home health care agencies and hospices. Nurses 
will therefore be able to receive their clinical training in the 
settings in which they are increasingly likely to practice.
  I am aware that there is other legislation being introduced today 
that addresses the nursing shortage. I applaud that action. I believe 
the numerous nursing bills demonstrate the deep congressional interest 
in reducing the nursing shortage, and the broad choice of policy 
proposals available. This is an issue that rises above partisanship and 
I anticipate that we will be able to work together to produce the very 
best policy.
  Adequate health care services cannot survive any further diminishing 
of the nursing workforce. All patients depend on the professional care 
of nurses, and we must make sure it will be there for them. Once again, 
I want to thank all my fellow cosponsors, and I urge my colleagues to 
support the Nurse Reinvestment Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. CRAPO:
  S. 707. A bill to provide grants for special environmental assistance 
for the regulation of communities and habitat (``SEARCH grants'') to 
small communities; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
authorize a national environmental grants program for small communities 
called Project SEARCH.
  I am particularly excited about the proposal because with each 
passing month, I have been hearing from new interested partners in 
helping with the legislation or have seen similar concepts advanced by 
others. Because of our mutual interest in helping small communities 
respond to environmental problems, I invite my colleagues to join me in 
supporting this measure.
  The national Project SEARCH, Special Environmental Assistance for the 
Regulation of Communities and Habitat, concept is based on a pilot 
program that operated with great success in Idaho in 1999 and 2000. In 
short, the bill establishes a simplified application process for 
communities with populations under 2,500 to receive assistance grants 
for meeting a broad array of federal, state, or local environmental 
regulations. Grants would be available for initial feasibility studies, 
to address unanticipated costs arising during the course of a project, 
or when a community has been turned down or underfunded by traditional 
sources. The program would require no match from the recipients.
  Some of the major highlights of the program are: A simplified 
application process--no special grants coordinators required; No 
unsolicited bureaucratic intrusions into the decision-making process; 
Communities must first have attempted to receive funds from traditional 
sources; It is open to studies or projects involving any environmental 
regulation; Applications are reviewed and approved by citizens panel of 
volunteers; The panel chooses the number of recipients and size of 
grants; The panel consists of volunteers representing all regions of 
the state; and No local match is required to receive the SEARCH funds.
  Over the past several years, it has become increasing apparent that 
small communities are having problems complying with environmental 
rules and regulations due primarily to lack of funding, not a 
willingness to do so. They, like all of us, want clean water and air 
and a healthy natural environment. Sometimes, they simply cannot 
shoulder the financial burden with their limited resources.
  In addition, small communities wishing to pursue unique collaborative 
efforts might be discouraged by grant administrators who prefer 
conformity. Some run into unexpected costs during a project and have 
borrowed and bonded to the maximum. Others are in critical habitat 
locations and any project may have additional costs, which may not be 
recognized by traditional financial sources. Still others just need 
help for the initial environmental feasibility study so they can 
identify the most effective path forward.
  With these needs in mind, in 1998, I was able to secure $1.3 million 
through the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, for a grant program 
for Idaho's small communities. Idaho's program does not replace other 
funding sources, but serves as a final resort when all other means have 
been exhausted.
  The application process was simplified so that any small town mayor, 
county commissioner, sewer district chairman, or community leader could 
manage it without hiring a professional grant writer. An independent 
citizens committee with statewide representation was established to 
make the selections and get the funds on the ground as quickly as 
possible. No bureaucratic or political intrusions were permitted.
  Although the EPA subsequently insisted that grants be limited to 
water and wastewater projects, forty-four communities in Idaho 
ultimately applied, not including two that failed to meet the 
eligibility requirements. Ultimately, twenty-one communities were 
awarded grants in several categories, and ranged in size from $9,000 to 
$319,000. Communities serving Native Americans and migrants, as well as 
several innovative collaborative efforts were included in the 
successful applicants. The communities that were not selected are being 
given assistance in exploring other funding sources and other advice.

[[Page S3536]]

  The response and feedback from all participants has been 
overwhelmingly positive. Environmental officials from the state and EPA 
who witnessed the process have stated that the process worked well and 
was able to accomplish much on a volunteer basis. There was even 
extraordinary appreciation from other funding agencies because some 
communities they were not able to reach were provided funds for 
feasibility studies. The only negative comments were from those who 
wished that the EPA had not limited the program to water and wastewater 
projects.
  The conclusion of all participants was that Project SEARCH is a 
program worthy of being expanded nationally. So many small communities 
in so many states can benefit from a program that assists underserved 
and often overlooked communities. This legislation provides us the 
opportunity to help small communities throughout the United States.
  I have been encouraged by statements from regulatory officials at the 
federal, state, and local level that have identified small communities 
as particularly in need of assistance in this area. Environmental 
organizations have also made favorable remarks about the importance of 
assisting small communities with the compliance costs of environmental 
regulations. Finally, I should also note that organizations 
representing small towns and rural areas recognize this long overlooked 
problem.
  I invite my colleague to take this opportunity to assist small 
communities in each of their states. Although the grant program 
provided for in this bill is not large in comparison to other things 
the federal government funds, these resources could be put to good and 
effective use, as Idaho has proven. Moreover, I will remind everyone 
that nowhere does this measure contemplate a change in environmental 
regulations or standards. This is simply about relief for small 
communities that would not otherwise be able to serve the public 
interest or the environment.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 709. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to clarify 
the tax treatment of Alaska Native Settlement Trusts; to the Committee 
on Finance.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined by Senator 
Stevens in introducing legislation that will allow Alaska Native 
Corporations to establish settlement trusts designed to promote the 
health, education, welfare and cultural heritage of Alaska Natives.
  Mr. President, in 1987, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act was 
amended to permit Native Corporations to establish settlement trusts to 
hold lands and investments for the benefit of current and future 
generations of Alaska Natives. Assets in these trusts are insulated 
from business exposure and risks and can be invested to provide 
distributions of income to Native shareholders and their future 
generations.
  Although the 1987 amendments were designed to facilitate the 
development of settlement trusts, many Native Corporations have been 
stymied in their efforts because the tax law, in many cases, imposes 
onerous penalties on the Native shareholders when the trusts are 
created. For example, when assets are transferred to the trust, they 
are treated as a de facto distribution of assets directly to the 
shareholders themselves to the extent of the corporation's earnings and 
profits.
  Even though the current shareholders receive no actual income at the 
time of the transfer into the trust, they are liable for income taxes 
as if they received an actual distribution. This not only requires the 
shareholder to come up with money to pay taxes on a distribution he or 
she never received, but also can result in a situation where a trust 
fund beneficiary is required to prepay taxes on his share of the entire 
trust corpus, which may be substantially more in taxes than the amount 
of cash benefits he or she will actually receive in the future.
  Our legislation remedies this inequity by allowing an Alaska Native 
Corporation to transfer property to an electing trust without tax to 
the beneficiaries. Electing trusts would annually pay tax on their and 
future distributions to beneficiaries would be taxable only to the 
extent such distributions exceeded the taxable income of the trust in 
that year and all prior years for which an election was in effect.
  Alaska Native Corporations are unique entities. Unlike Native 
American tribes in the lower 48, Alaska Native corporations are subject 
to income tax. But unlike ordinary C corporations, Alaska Native 
corporations have diverse purposes, one of which is to preserve and 
protect the heritage of the Native shareholders. The settlement trust 
concept is well suited to the special needs of Alaska's Natives. As the 
Conference Committee Report to ANSCA amendments of 1987 stated:
  ``Trust distributions may be used to fight poverty, provide food, 
shelter and clothing and served comparable economic welfare purposes. 
Additionally, cash distributions of trust income may be made on an 
across-the-board basis to the beneficiary population as part of the 
economic welfare function.''
  Settlement trusts will ensure that for generations to come, Native 
Alaskans will have a steady stream of income on which to continue 
building an economic base. The current tax rules discourage the 
creation of such trusts with the result that Native corporations are 
under extreme pressure to distribute all current earnings rather than 
prudently reinvesting for the future.
  It is my hope that we will be able to see this legislation adopted 
into law this year. For the long-term benefit of Alaska Natives, this 
tax law change is fundamentally necessary.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 709

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Alaska Native Settlement 
     Trust Tax Fairness Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. TAX TREATMENT AND INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS OF ALASKA 
                   NATIVE SETTLEMENT TRUSTS.

       (a) Treatment of Alaska Native Settlement Trusts.--Subpart 
     A of part I of subchapter J of chapter 1 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to general rules for taxation 
     of trusts and estates) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 646. TAX TREATMENT OF ALASKA NATIVE SETTLEMENT TRUSTS.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     section, the provisions of this subchapter and section 1(e) 
     shall apply to all Settlement Trusts.
       ``(b) Taxation of Income of Trust.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (f)(1)(B)(ii)--
       ``(1) In general.--There is hereby imposed on the taxable 
     income of an electing Settlement Trust, other than its net 
     capital gain, a tax at the lowest rate specified in section 
     1.
       ``(2) Capital gain.--In the case of an electing Settlement 
     Trust with a net capital gain for the taxable year, a tax is 
     hereby imposed on such gain at the rate of tax which would 
     apply to such gain if the taxpayer were subject to a tax on 
     its other taxable income at only the lowest rate specified in 
     section 1.
       ``(c) One-Time Election.--
       ``(1) In general.--A Settlement Trust may elect to have the 
     provisions of this section apply to the trust and its 
     beneficiaries.
       ``(2) Time and method of election.--An election under 
     paragraph (1) shall be made by the trustee of such trust--
       ``(A) on or before the due date (including extensions) for 
     filing the Settlement Trust's return of tax for the first 
     taxable year of such trust ending after the date of the 
     enactment of this section, and
       ``(B) by attaching to such return of tax a statement 
     specifically providing for such election.
       ``(3) Period election in effect.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (f), an election under this subsection--
       ``(A) shall apply to the first taxable year described in 
     paragraph (2)(A) and all subsequent taxable years, and
       ``(B) may not be revoked once it is made.
       ``(d) Contributions to Trust.--
       ``(1) Beneficiaries of electing trust not taxed on 
     contributions.--In the case of an electing Settlement Trust, 
     no amount shall be includible in the gross income of a 
     beneficiary of such trust by reason of a contribution to such 
     trust.
       ``(2) Earnings and profits.--The earnings and profits of 
     the sponsoring Native Corporation shall not be reduced on 
     account of any contribution to such Settlement Trust:
       ``(e) Tax Treatment of Distributions to Beneficiaries.--
     Amounts distributed by an electing Settlement Trust during 
     any taxable year shall be considered as having the following 
     characteristics in the hands of the recipient beneficiary:

[[Page S3537]]

       ``(1) First, as amounts excludable from gross income for 
     the taxable year to the extent of the taxable income of such 
     trust for such taxable year (decreased by any income tax paid 
     by the trust with respect to the income) plus any amount 
     excluded from gross income of the trust under section 103.
       ``(2) Second, as amounts excludable from gross income to 
     the extent of the amount described in paragraph (1) for all 
     taxable years for which an election is in effect under 
     subsection (c) with respect to the trust, and not previously 
     taken into account under paragraph (1).
       ``(3) Third, as amounts distributed by the sponsoring 
     Native Corporation with respect to its stock (within the 
     meaning of section 301(a)) during such taxable year and 
     taxable to the recipient beneficiary as amounts described in 
     section 301(c)(1), to the extent of current accumulated 
     earnings and profits of the sponsoring Native Corporation as 
     of the close of such taxable year after proper adjustment is 
     made for all distributions made by the sponsoring Native 
     Corporation during such taxable year.
       ``(4) Fourth, as amounts distributed by the trust in excess 
     of the distributable net income of such trust for such 
     taxable year.

     Amounts distributed to which paragraph (3) applies shall not 
     be treated as a corporate distribution subject to section 
     311(b), and for purposes of determining the amount of a 
     distribution for purposes of paragraph (3) and the basis to 
     the recipients, section 643(e) and not section 301(b) or (d) 
     shall apply.
       ``(f) Special Rules Where Transfer Restrictions Modified.--
       ``(1) Transfer of beneficial interests.--If, at any time, a 
     beneficial interest in an electing Settlement Trust may be 
     disposed of to a person in a manner which would not be 
     permitted by section 7(h) of the Alaska Native Claims 
     Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1606(h)) if such interest were 
     Settlement Common Stock--
       ``(A) no election may be made under subsection (c) with 
     respect to such trust, and
       ``(B) if such an election is in effect as of such time--
       ``(i) such election shall cease to apply as of the first 
     day of the taxable year in which such disposition is first 
     permitted,
       ``(ii) the provisions of this section shall not apply to 
     such trust for such taxable year and all taxable years 
     thereafter, and
       ``(iii) the distributable net income of such trust shall be 
     increased by the current and accumulated earnings and profits 
     of the sponsoring Native Corporation as of the close of such 
     taxable year after proper adjustment is made for all 
     distributions made by the sponsoring Native Corporation 
     during such taxable year.

     In no event shall the increase under clause (iii) exceed the 
     fair market value of the trust's assets as of the date the 
     beneficial interest of the trust first becomes so disposable. 
     The earnings and profits of the sponsoring Native Corporation 
     shall be adjusted as of the last day of such taxable year by 
     the amount of earnings and profits so included in the 
     distributable net income of the trust.
       ``(2) Stock in corporation.--If--
       ``(A) the Settlement Common Stock in the sponsoring Native 
     Corporation may be disposed of to a person in any manner not 
     permitted by section 7(h) of the Alaska Native Claims 
     Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1606(h)), and
       ``(B) at any time after such disposition of stock is first 
     permitted, such corporation transfers assets to a Settlement 
     Trust,

     paragraph (1)(B) shall be applied to such trust on and after 
     the date of the transfer in the same manner as if the trust 
     permitted dispositions of beneficial interests in the trust 
     in a manner not permitted by such section 7(h).
       ``(3) Certain distributions.--For purposes of this section, 
     the surrender of an interest in a Native Corporation or an 
     electing Settlement Trust in order to accomplish the whole or 
     partial redemption of the interest of a shareholder or 
     beneficiary in such corporation or trust, or to accomplish 
     the whole or partial liquidation of such corporation or 
     trust, shall be deemed to be a transfer permitted by section 
     7(h) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
       ``(g) Taxable Income.--For purposes of this title, the 
     taxable income of an electing Settlement Trust shall be 
     determined under section 641(b) without regard to any 
     deduction under section 651 or 661.
       ``(h) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Electing settlement trust.--The term `electing 
     Settlement Trust' means a Settlement Trust which has made the 
     election, effective for a taxable year, described in 
     subsection (c).
       ``(2) Native corporation.--The term `Native Corporation' 
     has the meaning given such term by section 3(m) of the Alaska 
     Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(m)).
       ``(3) Settlement common stock.--The term `Settlement Common 
     Stock' has the meaning given such term by section 3(p) of the 
     Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1602(p)).
       ``(4) Settlement trust.--The term `Settlement Trust' means 
     a trust that constitutes a settlement trust under section 
     3(t) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 
     1602(t)).
       ``(5) Sponsoring native corporation.--The term `sponsoring 
     Native Corporation' means the Native Corporation which 
     transfers assets to an electing Settlement Trust.
       ``(i) Special Loss Disallowance Rule.--Any loss that would 
     otherwise be recognized by a shareholder upon a disposition 
     of a share of stock of a sponsoring Native Corporation shall 
     be reduced (but not below zero) by the per share loss 
     adjustment factor. The per share loss adjustment factor shall 
     be the aggregate of all contributions to all electing 
     Settlement Trusts sponsored by such Native Corporation made 
     on or after the first day each trust is treated as an 
     electing Settlement Trust expressed on a per share basis and 
     determined as of the day of each such contribution.
       ``(j) Cross Reference.--

  ``For information required with respect to electing Settlement Trusts 
and sponsoring Native Corporations, see section 6039H.''.

       (b) Reporting.--Subpart A of part III of subchapter A of 
     chapter 61 of subtitle F of such Code (relating to 
     information concerning persons subject to special provisions) 
     is amended by inserting after section 6039G the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 6039H. INFORMATION WITH RESPECT TO ALASKA NATIVE 
                   SETTLEMENT TRUSTS AND SPONSORING NATIVE 
                   CORPORATIONS.

       ``(a) Requirement.--The fiduciary of an electing Settlement 
     Trust (as defined in section 646(h)(1)) shall include with 
     the return of income of the trust a statement containing the 
     information required under subsection (c).
       ``(b) Application With Other Requirements.--The filing of 
     any statement under this section shall be in lieu of the 
     reporting requirements under section 6034A to furnish any 
     statement to a beneficiary regarding amounts distributed to 
     such beneficiary (and such other reporting rules as the 
     Secretary deems appropriate).
       ``(c) Required Information.--The information required under 
     this subsection shall include--
       ``(1) the amount of distributions made during the taxable 
     year to each beneficiary,
       ``(2) the treatment of such distribution under the 
     applicable provision of section 646, including the amount 
     that is excludable from the recipient beneficiary's gross 
     income under section 646, and
       ``(3) the amount (if any) of any distribution during such 
     year that is deemed to have been made by the sponsoring 
     Native Corporation (as defined in section 646(h)(5)).
       ``(d) Sponsoring Native Corporation.--
       ``(1) In general.--The electing Settlement Trust shall, on 
     or before the date on which the statement under subsection 
     (a) is required to be filed, furnish such statement to the 
     sponsoring Native Corporation (as so defined).
       ``(2) Distributees.--The sponsoring Native Corporation 
     shall furnish each recipient of a distribution described in 
     section 646(e)(3) a statement containing the amount deemed to 
     have been distributed to such recipient by such corporation 
     for the taxable year.''.
       (c) Clerical Amendment.--
       (1) The table of sections for subpart A of part I of 
     subchapter J of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding 
     at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 646. Tax treatment of Alaska Native Settlement Trusts.''.

       (2) The table of sections for subpart A of part III of 
     subchapter A of chapter 61 of subtitle F of such Code is 
     amended by inserting after the item relating to section 6039G 
     the following new item:

``Sec. 6039H. Information with respect to Alaska Native Settlement 
              Trusts and sponsoring Native Corporations.''.

       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years ending after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act and to contributions made to electing 
     Settlement Trusts for such year or any subsequent year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself and Mr. Helms):
  S. 710. A bill to require coverage for colorectal cancer screenings; 
to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the ``Eliminate 
Colorectal Cancer Act of 2001''. I am pleased to have my colleague, 
Senator Helms, as the leading co-sponsor of this important legislation.
  Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among 
men and women in America. Over 50,000 Americans will die of this 
disease this year alone.
  The good news on colorectal cancer is that if it is detected early, 
we can dramatically improve the chance of survival. We have tried and 
true screening techniques that can not only discover this cancer early, 
but can prevent this disease by finding and eliminating growths before 
they become cancerous.
  The tragedy is that too often Americans do not get these lifesaving 
screenings. Today, only one-third of those at-risk for colorectal 
cancer are screened--and screening rates for minorities and women are 
even lower. All Americans age 50 and over should be screened for this 
disease, and there are many at increased risk who may need to start 
screening even earlier.

[[Page S3538]]

  Some are simply not aware they should be screened and others cannot 
afford to get this lifesaving test. We must work together for the day 
when no American is denied access to these lifesaving screening 
procedures simply because their health insurance company would not foot 
the bill.
  Medicare offers this important benefit. Now it's time that every 
American has that same assurance.
  That is why this week we are introducing ``The Eliminate Colorectal 
Cancer Act of 2001'', bipartisan legislation that will ensure that all 
health insurance covers screening procedures that can discover 
colorectal cancer in its earliest and most treatable stages.
  I am pleased that Representative Slaughter and Representative Morella 
are offering a similar bipartisan bill in the House, and I express my 
appreciation of so many from the cancer community on this legislation 
over the past couple of years.
  In this case, an ounce of prevention brings a lifesaving cure that 
could save tens of thousands of lives this year.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the ``Eliminate Colorectal 
Cancer Act of 2001'' be printed in the Record with a bill summary.
  There being no objection, the additional material was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 710

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Eliminate 
     Colorectal Cancer Act of 2001''.
       (b) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
       (1) Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer 
     deaths in the United States for men and women combined.
       (2) It is estimated that in 2001, 135,400 new cases of 
     colorectal cancer will be diagnosed in men and women in the 
     United States.
       (3) Colorectal cancer is expected to kill 56,700 
     individuals in the United States in 2001.
       (4) The adoption of a healthy lifestyle at a young age can 
     significantly reduce the risk of developing colorectal 
     cancer.
       (5) Appropriate screenings and regular tests, can save 
     large numbers of lives by leading to earlier identification 
     of colorectal cancer.
       (6) The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 
     Health Care Financing Administration, and the National Cancer 
     Institute have initiated the Screen for Life Campaign 
     targeted to individuals age 50 and older to spread the 
     message of the importance of colorectal cancer screening 
     tests.
       (7) Education helps to inform the public of symptoms for 
     the early detection of colorectal cancer and methods of 
     prevention.

     SEC. 2. COVERAGE FOR COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING.

       (a) Group Health Plans.--
       (1) Public health service act amendments.--
       (A) In general.--Subpart 2 of part A of title XXVII of the 
     Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-4 et seq.) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 2707. COVERAGE FOR COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING.

       ``(a) Coverage for Colorectal Cancer Screening.--
       ``(1) In general.--A group health plan, and a health 
     insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, 
     shall provide coverage for colorectal cancer screening at 
     regular intervals to--
       ``(A) any participant or beneficiary age 50 or over; and
       ``(B) any participant or beneficiary under the age of 50 
     who is at a high risk for colorectal cancer, or who may have 
     symptoms or circumstances that indicate a need for 
     colorectal cancer screening.
       ``(2) Definition of high risk.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a)(1)(B), the term `high risk for colorectal cancer' has the 
     meaning given such term in section 1861(pp)(2) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(pp)(2)).
       ``(3) Method of screening.--The group health plan or health 
     insurance issuer shall cover the method and frequency of 
     colorectal cancer screening deemed appropriate by a health 
     care provider treating such participant or beneficiary, in 
     consultation with the participant or beneficiary. Such 
     coverage shall include the procedures in section 1861(pp)(1) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(pp)(1)) and 
     section 4104(a)(2) of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.
       ``(b) Notice.--A group health plan under this part shall 
     comply with the notice requirement under section 714(b) of 
     the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 with 
     respect to the requirements of this section as if such 
     section applied to such plan.
       ``(c) Non-Preemption of More Protective State Law With 
     Respect to Health Insurance Issuers.--This section shall not 
     be construed to supersede any provision of State law which 
     establishes, implements, or continues in effect any standard 
     or requirement solely relating to health insurance issuers in 
     connection with group health insurance coverage that provides 
     greater protections to participants and beneficiaries than 
     the protections provided under this section.''.
       (B) Technical amendment.--Section 2723(c) of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-23(c)) is amended by 
     striking ``section 2704'' and inserting ``sections 2704 and 
     2707''.
       (2) ERISA amendments.--
       (A) In general.--Subpart B of part 7 of subtitle B of title 
     I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 
     U.S.C. 1185 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 714. COVERAGE FOR COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING.

       ``(a) Coverage for Colorectal Cancer Screening.--
       ``(1) In general.--A group health plan, and a health 
     insurance issuer offering group health insurance coverage, 
     shall provide coverage for colorectal cancer screening at 
     regular intervals to--
       ``(A) any participant or beneficiary age 50 or over; and
       ``(B) any participant or beneficiary under the age of 50 
     who is at a high risk for colorectal cancer, or who may have 
     symptoms or circumstances that indicate a need for colorectal 
     cancer screening.
       ``(2) Definition of high risk.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a)(1)(B), the term `high risk for colorectal cancer' has the 
     meaning given such term in section 1861(pp)(2) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(pp)(2)).
       ``(3) Method of screening.--The group health plan or health 
     insurance issuer shall cover the method and frequency of 
     colorectal cancer screening deemed appropriate by a health 
     care provider treating such participant or beneficiary, in 
     consultation with the participant or beneficiary. Such 
     coverage shall include the procedures in section 1861(pp)(1) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(pp)(1)) and 
     section 4104(a)(2) of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.
       ``(b) Notice Under Group Health Plan.--The imposition of 
     the requirements of this section shall be treated as a 
     material modification in the terms of the plan described in 
     section 102(a), for purposes of assuring notice of such 
     requirements under the plan; except that the summary 
     description required to be provided under the third to last 
     sentence of section 104(b)(1) with respect to such 
     modification shall be provided by not later than 60 days 
     after the first day of the first plan year in which such 
     requirements apply.''.
       (B) Technical and conforming amendments.--
       (i) Section 731(c) of the Employee Retirement Income 
     Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1191(c)) is amended by 
     striking ``section 711'' and inserting ``sections 711 and 
     714''.
       (ii) Section 732(a) of the Employee Retirement Income 
     Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1191a(a)) is amended by 
     striking ``section 711'' and inserting ``sections 711 and 
     714''.
       (iii) The table of contents in section 1 of the Employee 
     Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 713 the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 714. Coverage for colorectal cancer screening.''.

       (b) Individual Health Insurance.--
       (1) In general.--Part B of title XXVII of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-41 et seq.) is amended by 
     inserting after section 2752 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 2753. COVERAGE FOR COLORECTAL CANCER SCREENING.

       ``(a) In General.--The provisions of section 2707(a) shall 
     apply to health insurance coverage offered by a health 
     insurance issuer in the individual market in the same manner 
     as it applies to health insurance coverage offered by a 
     health insurance issuer in connection with a group health 
     plan in the small or large group market.
       ``(b) Notice.--A health insurance issuer under this part 
     shall comply with the notice requirement under section 714(b) 
     of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 with 
     respect to the requirements referred to in subsection (a) as 
     if such section applied to such issuer and such issuer were a 
     group health plan.''.
       (2) Technical amendment.--Section 2762(b)(2) of the Public 
     Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-62(b)(2)) is amended by 
     striking ``section 2751'' and inserting ``sections 2751 and 
     2753''.
       (c) Effective Dates.--
       (1) Group health plans.--
       (A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (B), the 
     amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply with respect to 
     group health plans for plan years beginning on or after 
     January 1, 2002.
       (B) Collective bargaining agreements.--In the case of a 
     group health plan maintained pursuant to 1 or more collective 
     bargaining agreements between employee representatives and 1 
     or more employers ratified before the date of enactment of 
     this Act, the amendments made by subsection (a) shall not 
     apply to plan years beginning before the later of--
       (i) the date on which the last collective bargaining 
     agreements relating to the plan terminates (determined 
     without regard to any extension thereof agreed to after the 
     date of enactment of this Act), or
       (ii) January 1, 2002.
     For purposes of clause (i), any plan amendment made pursuant 
     to a collective bargaining agreement relating to the plan 
     which amends the plan solely to conform to any requirement 
     added by subsection (a) shall not be treated as a termination 
     of such collective bargaining agreement.
       (2) Individual health insurance.--The amendments made by 
     subsection (b) shall

[[Page S3539]]

     apply with respect to health insurance coverage offered, 
     sold, issued, renewed, in effect, or operated in the 
     individual market on or after January 1, 2002.
       (d) Coordinated Regulations.--The Secretary of Labor and 
     the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall ensure, 
     through the execution of an interagency memorandum of 
     understanding among such Secretaries, that--
       (1) regulations, rulings, and interpretations issued by 
     such Secretaries relating to the same matter over which both 
     Secretaries have responsibility under the provisions of this 
     section (and the amendments made thereby) are administered so 
     as to have the same effect at all times; and
       (2) coordination of policies relating to enforcing the same 
     requirements through such Secretaries in order to have a 
     coordinated enforcement strategy that avoids duplication of 
     enforcement efforts and assigns priorities in enforcement.
                                  ____


                Eliminate Colorectal Cancer Act of 2001


                     endorsements and bill summary

       Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer 
     deaths among men and women. Each year, more than 56,000 
     Americans die from this devastating disease, yet colorectal 
     cancer can be easily prevented or treated when it is 
     diagnosed early through regular, appropriate screening tests. 
     Unfortunately, only one-third of the at-risk United States 
     population is currently screened for colorectal cancer. In 
     the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, Congress acted to encourage 
     more screening by creating a new colorectal cancer screening 
     benefit for Medicare beneficiaries. We believe the time has 
     come for persons under age 65.
       The Eliminate Colorectal Cancer Act of 2001 would require 
     all health insurance plans to cover colorectal cancer 
     screening for all patients age 50 and over and for others who 
     have significant risk factors for the disease. The screening 
     method and frequency of the test would be based on the 
     patient's medical condition and decided by the treating 
     physician, in consultation with the patient. Methods covered 
     under the Act are those that are available under Medicare.
       As colorectal cancer survivors in every state will attest, 
     early detection and treatment are essential to winning this 
     battle. More than 90 percent of people whose colorectal 
     cancer is detected and treated early are able to resume 
     active and productive lives.
       This legislation is strongly supported by these and many 
     other leading organizations:
       American Cancer Society, American Gastroenterological 
     Association, Cancer Research Foundation of America, American 
     Association for Clinical Chemistry, Digestive Disease 
     National Coalition, Association of Community Cancer Centers, 
     American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging, 
     American College of Gastroenterology, American Society for 
     Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Colon Cancer Alliance, Hereditary 
     Colon Cancer Association, Crohn's and Colitis Foundation of 
     America, Men's Health Network, Cancercare, Society for 
     Gastroenterological Nurses and Associates.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 711. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to maintain 
exemption of Alaska from dyeing requirements for exempt diesel fuel and 
kerosene; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, today I am joined by Senator Ted 
Stevens in introducing legislation that would clarify a provision in 
the tax code that exempts the State of Alaska from the IRS diesel 
dyeing rules.
  The Small Business Job Protection Act of 1996 included a provision 
that exempted Alaska from the diesel dyeing requirements during the 
period the state was exempted from the Clean Air Act low sulfur diesel 
dyeing rules. For various reasons, it was believed at the time that 
Alaska would ultimately be permanently exempted from the Clean Air Act 
rules. However, technological changes suggest that Alaska may in the 
next few years lose its exemption from the low sulfur rules.
  However, in our view, whether Alaska is exempted from the low sulfur 
rules, it is imperative that Alaska be permanently exempted from the 
IRS diesel dyeing rules. That is what our bill does.
  Today, more than 95 percent of all diesel fuel used in Alaska is 
exempt from tax because it is used for heating, power generation, or in 
commercial fishing boats. Under the diesel dyeing rules in place in 49 
states, exempt diesel must be dyed. If these diesel dyeing rules were 
applied to Alaska, refiners would have to buy huge quantities of dye, 
along with expensive injection systems, to dye all of this non-taxable 
diesel fuel.
  Although the Joint Tax Committee originally estimated in 1996 that 
repealing the dyeing rules for Alaska could cost the Treasury $500,000 
a year, some refiners were spending as much as $750,000 on dye alone. 
Add on another $100,000 for injection systems and you begin to wonder 
what happened to common sense regulation. Congress saw it that way and 
decided to exempt Alaska. Now that exemption should be made permanent.
  Approximately 65 percent of the state's communities are served solely 
by barges. For many of these communities, the fuel oil barge comes in 
only once a year when the waterways are not frozen. It is absurd to 
require these communities to build a second storage facility for undyed 
taxable fuel simply for the few vehicles in town that are subject to 
tax.
  It is currently projected that the state will have to spend from $200 
million to $400 million just to repair fuel storage tanks in hundreds 
of rural communities because of leaking fuel problems. If IRS dyeing 
rules were in place, millions more would have to be spent simply to 
maintain a small supply of taxable diesel in each of these communities.
  In 1996, Congress acted sensibly in exempting Alaska from the IRS 
diesel dyeing rules. It is my hope that we will again see the wisdom of 
exempting Alaska, this time making it a permanent exemption.
  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. 711

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

     SECTION 1. ALASKA EXEMPTION FROM DYEING REQUIREMENTS.

       (a) Exception to Dyeing Requirements for Exempt Diesel Fuel 
     and Kerosene.--Paragraph (1) of section 4082(c) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exception to 
     dyeing requirements) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) removed, entered, or sold in the State of Alaska for 
     ultimate sale or use in such State, and''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     applies with respect to fuel removed, entered, or sold on or 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. THOMAS:
  S. 712. A bill to prohibit commercial air tour operations over 
Yellowstone National Park and Grand Teton National Park; to the 
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
protect two crown jewels of the National Park Service, Yellowstone and 
Grand Teton National Parks.
  The ``Yellowstone and Teton Scenic Overflight Act of 2001'' is 
similar to legislation I introduced last Congress regarding an 
important issue facing these two parks. Specifically, this legislation 
would prohibit all scenic flights--both fixed wing and helicopter--over 
Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks. Recently, a proposed scenic 
helicopter tour operation near Grand Teton had many folks concerned 
about the impact its operations would have on these magnificent areas.
  This legislation is designed to protect Yellowstone and Teton and the 
natural and historic values of these parks in the interest of all who 
visit and enjoy these areas. I am aware of that the National Parks Air 
Tour Management Act, which became law during the 106th Congress, 
provides a process that attempts to address scenic overflight 
operations in our parks. Unfortunately, the regulations being developed 
for the Act continue to be delayed and it is unclear when they will 
ultimately be published. The unique nature of Yellowstone and Teton 
parks requires us to act in a quick and decisive manner to address this 
issue as soon as possible.
  Grand Teton National Park is home to the only airport in the 
continental United States that is entirely within a national park. 
Commercial air tours by their very nature, fly passengers purposefully 
over the parks, at low altitudes, often to the very locations and 
attractions favored by ground-based visitors. The threats posed by 
these operations to Yellowstone and Teton require our quick action.
  As Chairman of the Senate Energy Committee's Subcommittee on National 
Parks and Historic Preservation, I understand the importance of our 
nation's parks. They are our national treasures and deserve to be 
protected to the best of our ability. I hope the

[[Page S3540]]

Senate will take quick action on this legislation so that visitors can 
enjoy the sounds of nature at Grand Teton and Yellowstone National 
Parks now and in the future.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. MURKOWSKI (for himself and Mr. Stevens):
  S. 713. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
a charitable deduction for certain expenses incurred in support of 
Native Alaskan subsistence whaling; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I rise on behalf of myself and Senator 
Stevens to introduce legislation that would resolve a dispute that has 
existed for several years between the IRS and native whaling captains 
in my state. Our legislation would amend the Internal Revenue Code to 
ensure that a charitable donation tax deduction would be allowed for 
native whaling captains who organize and support subsistence whaling 
activities in their communities.
  Subsistence whaling is a necessity to the Alaska Native community. In 
many of our remote village communities, the whale hunt is a tradition 
that has been carried on for generations over many millennia. It is the 
custom that the captain of the hunt make all provisions for the meals, 
wages and equipment costs associated with this important activity.
  In most instances, the Captain is repaid in whale meat and muktuck, 
which is blubber and skin. However, as part of the tradition, the 
Captain is required to donate a substantial portion of the whale to his 
village in order to help the community survive.
  The proposed deduction would allow the Captain to deduct up to $7,500 
to help defray the costs associated with providing this community 
service.
  I want to point out that if the Captain incurred all of these 
expenses and then donated the whale meat to a local charitable 
organization, the Captain would almost certainly be able to deduct the 
costs he incurred in outfitting the boat for the charitable purpose. 
However, the cultural significance of the Captain's sharing the whale 
with the community would be lost.
  This is a very modest effort to allow the Congress to recognize the 
importance of this part of our native Alaskan tradition. When this 
measure passed the Senate two years ago, the Joint Committee on 
Taxation estimated that this provision would cost a mere three million 
dollars over a 10 year period. I think that is a very small price for 
preserving this vital link with our natives' heritage.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 713

       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 ``Native Alaskan Subsistence 
     Whaling Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTION DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN 
                   EXPENSES INCURRED IN SUPPORT OF NATIVE ALASKAN 
                   SUBSISTENCE WHALING.

       (a) In General.--Section 170 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to charitable, etc., contributions and 
     gifts) is amended by redesignating subsection (m) as 
     subsection (n) and by inserting after subsection (l) the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(m) Expenses Paid by Certain Whaling Captains in Support 
     of Native Alaskan Subsistence Whaling.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of an individual who is 
     recognized by the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission as a 
     whaling captain charged with the responsibility of 
     maintaining and carrying out sanctioned whaling activities 
     and who engages in such activities during the taxable year, 
     the amount described in paragraph (2) (to the extent such 
     amount does not exceed $7,500 for the taxable year) shall be 
     treated for purposes of this section as a charitable 
     contribution.
       ``(2) Amount described.--
       ``(A) In general.--The amount described in this paragraph 
     is the aggregate of the reasonable and necessary whaling 
     expenses paid by the taxpayer during the taxable year in 
     carrying out sanctioned whaling activities.
       ``(B) Whaling expenses.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), 
     the term `whaling expenses' includes expenses for--
       ``(i) the acquisition and maintenance of whaling boats, 
     weapons, and gear used in sanctioned whaling activities,
       ``(ii) the supplying of food for the crew and other 
     provisions for carrying out such activities, and
       ``(iii) storage and distribution of the catch from such 
     activities.
       ``(3) Sanctioned whaling activities.--For purposes of this 
     subsection, the term `sanctioned whaling activities' means 
     subsistence bowhead whale hunting activities conducted 
     pursuant to the management plan of the Alaska Eskimo Whaling 
     Commission.''
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2000.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself and Mr. Kerry):
  S. 714. A bill to urge the United States Trade Representative to 
pursue the establishment of a small business advocate within the World 
Trade Organization, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
designed to promote export opportunities for our nation's small 
businesses.
  Nationwide, an estimated 13 to 16 million small businesses account 
for over 99 percent of all employers. They also employ over 50 percent 
of the workforce, and account for virtually all of the new jobs being 
created. Maine, in particular, is a state with a historical record of 
self-reliance and small business enterprise. Of the roughly 37,000 
employers, about 97 percent are small firms. Maine also boasts an 
estimated 73,000 self-employed persons. Surveys credit small businesses 
with virtually all of the new job creation in the state as well.
  In addition, small firms played a central role in the latest economic 
expansion. From 1992 to 1996, for example, small firms created 75 
percent of the new jobs, up 10.5 percent, while large company 
employment grew only 3.7 percent. In the trade arena, according to the 
U.S. Small Business Administration, SBA, the number of small U.S. firms 
engaged in exporting has tripled since 1987, and over the past five 
years, the dollar value of small business exports has grown 300 
percent. Small business now accounts for 31 percent of the value of 
U.S. exports. Overall, 97 percent of all exporters are small 
businesses, with the most dramatic export growth among companies 
employing less than 20 people. Firms engaged in international trade are 
20 percent more productive, and employee wages are 15 percent higher in 
firms that trade as compared to firms that do not engage in trade. 
These firms are also 9 percent less likely to go bankrupt, and 
experience 20 percent greater job growth than non-traders.
  Despite these impressive statistics, less than one percent of U.S. 
small businesses are engaged in international trade-related business 
activities. That is why I believe so strongly that there is substantial 
export potential in the small business community that has yet to be 
fully realized.
  Small and medium-sized businesses are the fastest growing segment of 
the international business community. However, many report that their 
interests have not been given sufficient attention by our international 
trade negotiators. In addition, small businesses often cannot afford to 
maintain in-house international trade expertise to resolve complex 
trade problems. Small business advocacy groups often lack political 
influence in foreign markets, which hinders solving problems outside of 
the legal process. Small firms often do not have the sales volume to 
overcome the costs of trade barriers and substantial overhead expenses 
in international transactions.
  With these concerns in mind, in January, I introduced the Small 
Business Enhancement Act of 2001, which contains a provision to 
establish the position of Assistant United Trade Representative for 
Small Business. I believe that this important step would ensure that 
small businesses have a seat at the table when international trade 
agreements are being negotiated.
  The measure I am introducing today takes this concept one step 
further by expressing the sense of the Senate that the United States 
Trade Representative, USTR, should pursue the establishment of a small 
business advocate within the World Trade Organization, WTO, as a matter 
of U.S. policy.
  Because the WTO is the principal international organization for rules 
governing world-wide international trade, it has the potential to 
address a range of global trade issues of concern to small businesses 
in the U.S. In addition, it stands to reason that better coordination 
is needed between small business support and advocacy agencies around 
the world and small firms and trade associations.

[[Page S3541]]

  My bill requires the USTR to pursue the establishment of a small 
business advocate at the WTO in order to safeguard the interests of 
small firms and represent those interests in trade negotiations and 
disputes. It also directs the USTR to submit a report to Congress on 
the steps taken to establish this advocate.
  I hope this legislation will provide a foundation for small 
businesses during the next round of WTO negotiations. I look forward to 
working with the Senate Small Business Committee and the Senate Finance 
Committee as we work to ensure that U.S. businesses enjoy the full 
benefits of international trade.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BAUCUS:
  S. 715. A bill to designate 7 counties in the State of Montana as 
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas and authorize funding for drug 
control activities in those areas; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. President, I rise today to introduce critical 
legislation in the fight against methamphetamine use in rural America.
  Methamphetamine also known as ``meth'' is a powerful and addictive 
drug. Considered by many youths to be a casual, soft-core drug with few 
lasting effects. They couldn't be more wrong. Meth can actually cause 
more long-term damage to the body than cocaine or crack. The physical 
damage is just the beginning. The societal damage resulting from 
rampant meth use is incalculable. The damage caused ranges from broken 
homes to violent crime such as increased child abuse to a higher 
robbery rate.
  Meth use in Montana alone has skyrocketed in the past few years. 
During 1996, 1 meth lab was seized statewide, 4 in 1997, twelve in 
1998, 50 in 1999, 100 in 2000, and at least 150 expected this year. The 
DEA reported an increase of meth lab seizures in Montana of 900 percent 
from 1993 to 1998. And according to the Office of National Drug Control 
Policy, based on admission rates per 100,000 persons, Montana is one of 
the eight states with a ``serious methamphetamine problem.''
  The meth problem is particularly severe on Montana's Indian 
reservations, of which our state has seven. Life is hard there. In some 
reservation towns, over half of the working age adults are unemployed. 
Because meth is cheap and relatively easy to make, these lower-income 
individuals are a natural target for meth peddlers. Without viable 
employment options, too often these young people turn to drugs.
  So how does a rural state like Montana deal with such a scourge? The 
answer is not very well. The fact is, there are a good many talented 
Montanans working on the meth problem, but they have few resources with 
which to wage the battle. Fewer every day with no options for 
leveraging additional resources. Moreover, their efforts are often 
fragmented, not coordinated to the extent they could be, particularly 
among the treatment, prevention, and law enforcement communities. 
Again, it's simply an issue of scarcity of resources.
  To make their job easier, Montana has petitioned to be considered 
part of the Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area 
(HIDTA). Although the Rocky Mountain HIDTA authorities have stated 
their willingness to include Montana in its organization, they lack the 
resources to make that happen.
  The bill I am introducing today would authorize funding to make 
Montana's admission to the Rocky Mountain HIDTA a reality. This 
legislation would provide Montana the resources to put forth a 
coordinated effort in the fight against meth in Montana. By admitting 
the seven counties included in the legislation, we begin to attack the 
scourge at its roots-where it enters the state and is the most 
problematic for meth use. In a perfect world, we could include all 56 
Montana counties, but I believe this is a good start. It will increase 
law enforcement and forensic personnel in Montana; coordinate efforts 
to exchange information among law enforcement agencies; and engage in a 
public information campaign to educate the public about the dangers of 
meth use.
  Mr. President, the time has come to fight this scourge. Montana is 
under siege by meth, and we must do all we can to continue our efforts 
to stop it.
           By Mr. SANTORUM:
       S. 716. A bill to amend the Consolidated Farm and Rural 
     Development Act to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to 
     make grants to nonprofit organizations to finance the 
     construction, refurbishing, and servicing of individually-
     owned household water well systems in rural areas for 
     individuals with low or moderate incomes; to the Committee on 
     Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.

  Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
``Affordable Drinking Water Act of 2001.'' I am pleased to reintroduce 
this bill in the 107th Congress as I believe it sets out an innovative 
approach to meet the safe drinking water needs of rural Americans 
nationwide.
  The Affordable Drinking Water Act of 2001 provides a targeted 
alternative to water delivery in rural areas. Low to moderate income 
households who would prefer to have their own well, or are experiencing 
drinking water problems, could secure financing to install or refurbish 
an individually owned household well. In my home state of Pennsylvania, 
2.5 million citizens currently choose to have their drinking water 
supplied by privately-owned individual water wells.
  The approach envisioned under this bill would establish a partnership 
between the federal government and non-profit entities to administer 
grants to eligible homeowners for the purposes of: bringing old 
household water wells up to current standards; replacing systems that 
have met their expected life; or providing homeowners without a 
drinking water source with a new individual household water well 
system.
  Another important component of this legislation will afford rural 
consumers with individually owned water wells the same payment 
flexibility as other utility customers. Centralized water systems 
currently are eligible to receive federal grants and loans with 
repayment spread out over 40 years. The Affordable Drinking Water Act 
of 2001 would provide loans to low to moderate income homeowners to 
upgrade or install a household drinking water well now, and then repay 
the cost through monthly installments. This ability to stretch out 
payments over the life of the loan gives rural well owners an 
affordable option that they otherwise do not have.
  Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce this legislation today, and 
believe that it is appropriately balanced to meet the safe-drinking 
water needs of rural households.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN:
  S. 717. A bill to provide educational opportunities for disadvantaged 
children, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing legislation to 
authorize a three-year nationwide school choice demonstration program 
targeted at children from economically disadvantaged families. The 
program would expand educational opportunities for low-income children 
by providing parents and students the freedom to choose the best school 
for their unique academic needs, while encouraging schools to be 
creative and responsive to the needs of all students.
  This bill authorizes $1.8 billion annually for fiscal years 2002 
through 2004 to be used to provide school choice vouchers to 
economically disadvantaged children through the nation. The funds would 
be divided among the states based upon the number of children they have 
enrolled in public schools. Then, each state would conduct a lottery 
among low-income children who attend the public schools with the lowest 
academic performance in their state. Each child selected in the lottery 
would receive $2,000 per year for three years to be used to pay tuition 
at any school of their choice in the state, including private or 
religious schools. The money could also be used to pay for 
transportation to the school or supplementary educational services to 
meet the unique needs of the individual student.
  In total, this bill authorizes $5.4 billion for the three-year school 
choice demonstration program, as well as a GAO evaluation of the 
program upon its completion. The cost of this important test of school 
vouchers is fully offset by eliminating more than $5.4 billion in 
unnecessary pork and inequitable corporate tax loopholes.
  Mr. President, we all know that one of the most important issues 
facing our nation is the education of our children. Providing a solid, 
quality education for each and every child in our nation is a critical 
component in their quest for

[[Page S3542]]

personal success and fulfillment. A solid education for our children 
also plays a pivotal role in the success of our nation; economically, 
intellectually, civically and morally.
  We must strive to develop and implement initiatives which strengthen 
and improve our education system thereby ensuring that our children are 
provided with the essential academic tools for succeeding 
professionally, economically and personally. I am sure we all agree 
that increasing the academic performance and skills of all our nation's 
students must be the paramount goal of any education reform we 
implement.
  School vouchers are a viable method of allowing all American children 
access to high quality schools, including private and religious 
schools. Every parent should be able to obtain the highest quality 
education for their children, not just the wealthy. Tuition vouchers 
would finally provide low-income children trapped in mediocre, or 
worse, schools the same educational choices as children of economic 
privilege.
  Some of my colleagues may argue that vouchers would divert money away 
from our nation's public schools and instead of instilling competition 
into our school systems we should be pouring more and more money into 
poor performing public schools. I respectfully disagree. While I 
support strengthening financial support for education in our nation, 
the solution to what ails our system is not simply pouring more and 
more money into it.
  Currently our nation spends significantly more money that most 
countries and yet our students scored lower than their peers from 
almost all of the forty countries which participated in the last Third 
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS) test. Students in 
countries which are struggling economically, socially and politically, 
such as Russia, outscored U.S. children in math and scored far above 
them in advanced math and physics. Clearly, we must make significant 
change beyond simply pouring more money into the current structure in 
order to improve our children's academic performance in order to 
maintain a viable force in the world economy.
  It is shameful that we are failing to provide many of our children 
with adequate training and quality academic preparation for the real 
world. The number of college freshman who require remedial courses in 
reading, writing and mathematics when they begin their higher education 
is unacceptably high. In fact, presently, more than 30 percent of 
entering freshman need to enroll in one of more remedial course when 
they start college. It does not bode well for our future economy if the 
majority of workers are not prepared with the basic skills to engage in 
a competitive global marketplace.
  I concede that school vouchers are not the magic bullet for 
eradicating all that is wrong with our current educational system, but 
they are an important opportunity for providing improved academic 
opportunities for all children, not just the wealthy. Examination of 
the limited voucher programs scattered around our country reveal high 
levels of parent and student satisfaction, an increase in parental 
involvement, and a definite improvement in attendance and discipline at 
the participating schools. Vouchers encourage public schools, 
communities and parents to all work together to raise the level of 
education for all students. Through this bill, we have the opportunity 
to replicate these important attributes throughout all or nation's 
communities.
  Thomas Jefferson said, ``The purpose of education is to create young 
citizens with knowing heads and loving hearts.'' If we fail to give our 
children the education they need to nuture their heads and hearts, then 
we threaten their futures and the future of our nation. Each of us is 
responsible for ensuring that our children have both the love in their 
hearts and the knowledge in their heads to not only dream, but to make 
their dreams a reality.
  The time has come for us to finally conduct a national demonstration 
of school choice to determine the benefits or perhaps disadvantages of 
providing educational choices to all students, not just those who are 
fortunate enough to be born into a wealthy family. I urge my colleagues 
to support this bill and put the needs of America's school children 
ahead of pork barrel projects and tax loopholes benefitting only 
special interests and big business.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this bill be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 717

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

     SECTION 1. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to assist States to--
       (A) give children from low-income families the same choices 
     among all elementary and secondary schools and other academic 
     programs as children from wealthier families already have;
       (B) improve schools and other academic programs by giving 
     parents in low-income families increased consumer power to 
     choose the schools and programs that the parents determine 
     best fit the needs of their children; and
       (C) more fully engage parents in their children's 
     schooling; and
       (2) to demonstrate, through a 3-year national grant 
     program, the effects of a voucher program that gives parents 
     in low-income families--
       (A) choice among public, private, and religious schools for 
     their children; and
       (B) access to the same academic options as parents in 
     wealthy families have for their children.

     SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act (other than section 10) $1,800,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2001 through 2004.
       (b) Evaluation.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out section 10 $17,000,000 for fiscal years 2002 
     through 2005.

     SEC. 3. PROGRAM AUTHORITY.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall make grants to States, 
     from allotments made under section 4 to enable the States to 
     carry out educational choice programs that provide 
     scholarships, in accordance with this Act.
       (b) Limit on Federal Administrative Expenditures.--The 
     Secretary may reserve not more than $1,000,000 of the amounts 
     appropriated under section 2(a) for a fiscal year to pay for 
     the costs of administering this Act.

     SEC. 4. ALLOTMENTS TO STATES.

       (a) Allotments.--The Secretary shall make the allotments to 
     States in accordance with a formula specified in regulations 
     issued in accordance with subsection (b). The formula shall 
     provide that the Secretary shall allot to each State an 
     amount that bears the same relationship to the amounts 
     appropriated under section 2(a) for a fiscal year (other than 
     funds reserved under section 3(b)) as the number of covered 
     children in the State bears to the number of covered children 
     in all such States.
       (b) Formula.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue regulations 
     specifying the formula referred to in subsection (a).
       (c) Limit on State Administrative Expenditures.--The State 
     may reserve not more than 1 percent of the funds made 
     available through the State allotment to pay for the costs of 
     administering this Act.
       (d) Definition.--In this section, the term ``covered 
     child'' means a child who is enrolled in a public school 
     (including a charter school) that is an elementary school or 
     secondary school.

     SEC. 5. ELIGIBLE SCHOOLS.

       (a) Eligibility.--
       (1) In general.--Schools identified by a State under 
     paragraph (2) shall be considered to be eligible schools 
     under this Act.
       (2) Determination.--Not later than 180 days after the date 
     the Secretary issues regulations under section 4(b), each 
     State shall identify the public elementary schools and 
     secondary schools in the State that are at or below the 25th 
     percentile for academic performance of schools in the State.
       (b) Performance.--The State shall determine the academic 
     performance of a school under this section based on such 
     criteria as the State may consider to be appropriate.

     SEC. 6. SCHOLARSHIPS.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Scholarship awards.--With funds awarded under this Act, 
     each State awarded a grant under this Act shall provide 
     scholarships to the parents of eligible children, in 
     accordance with subsections (b) and (c). The State shall 
     ensure that the scholarships may be redeemed for elementary 
     or secondary education for the children at any of a broad 
     variety of public and private schools, including religious 
     schools, in the State.
       (2) Scholarship amount.--The amount of each scholarship 
     shall be $2000 per year.
       (3) Tax exemption.--Scholarships awarded under this Act 
     shall not be considered income of the parents for Federal 
     income tax purposes or for determining eligibility for any 
     other Federal program.
       (b) Eligible Children.--To be eligible to receive a 
     scholarship under this Act, a child shall be--
       (1) a child who is enrolled in a public elementary school 
     or secondary school that is an eligible school; and
       (2) a member of a family with a family income that is not 
     more than 200 percent of the poverty line.

[[Page S3543]]

       (c) Award Rules.--
       (1) Priority.--In providing scholarships under this Act, 
     the State shall provide scholarships for eligible children 
     through a lottery system administered for all eligible 
     schools in the State by the State educational agency.
       (2) Continuing eligibility.--Each State receiving a grant 
     under this Act to carry out an educational choice program 
     shall provide a scholarship in each year of the program to 
     each child who received a scholarship during the previous 
     year of the program, unless--
       (A) the child no longer resides in the area served by an 
     eligible school;
       (B) the child no longer attends school;
       (C) the child's family income exceeds, by 20 percent or 
     more, 200 percent of the poverty line; or
       (D) the child is expelled or convicted of a felony, 
     including felonious drug possession, possession of a weapon 
     on school grounds, or a violent act against an other student 
     or a member of the school's faculty.

     SEC. 7. USES OF FUNDS.

       Any scholarship awarded under this Act for a year shall be 
     used--
       (1) first, for--
       (A) the payment of tuition and fees at the school selected 
     by the parents of the child for whom the scholarship was 
     provided; and
       (B) the reasonable costs of the child's transportation to 
     the school, if the school is not the school to which the 
     child would be assigned in the absence of a program under 
     this Act;
       (2) second, if the parents so choose, to obtain 
     supplementary academic services for the child, at a cost of 
     not more than $500, from any provider chosen by the parents, 
     that the State determines is capable of providing such 
     services and has an appropriate refund policy; and
       (3) finally, for educational programs that help the 
     eligible child achieve high levels of academic excellence in 
     the school attended by the eligible child, if the eligible 
     child chooses to attend a public school.

     SEC. 8. STATE REQUIREMENT.

       A State that receives a grant under this Act shall allow 
     lawfully operating public and private elementary schools and 
     secondary schools, including religious schools, if any, 
     serving the area involved to participate in the program.

     SEC. 9. EFFECT OF PROGRAMS.

       (a) Title I.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, 
     if a local educational agency in the State would, in the 
     absence of an educational choice program that is funded under 
     this Act, provide services to a participating eligible child 
     under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.), the State 
     shall ensure the provision of such services to such child.
       (b) Individuals With Disabilities.--Nothing in this Act 
     shall be construed to affect the requirements of part B of 
     the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 
     1411 et seq.).
       (c) Aid.--
       (1) In general.--Scholarships under this Act shall be 
     considered to aid families, not institutions. For purposes of 
     determining Federal assistance under Federal law, a parent's 
     expenditure of scholarship funds under this Act at a school 
     or for supplementary academic services shall not constitute 
     Federal financial aid or assistance to that school or to the 
     provider of supplementary academic services.
       (2) Supplementary academic services.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a school or 
     provider of supplementary academic services that receives 
     scholarship funds under this Act shall, as a condition of 
     participation under this Act, comply with the provisions of 
     title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000d et 
     seq.) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 
     U.S.C. 794).
       (B) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate 
     regulations to implement the provisions of subparagraph (A), 
     taking into account the purposes of this Act and the nature, 
     variety, and missions of schools and providers that may 
     participate in providing services to children under this Act.
       (d) Other Federal Funds.--No Federal, State, or local 
     agency may, in any year, take into account Federal funds 
     provided to a State or to the parents of any child under this 
     Act in determining whether to provide any other funds from 
     Federal, State, or local resources, or in determining the 
     amount of such assistance, to such State or to a school 
     attended by such child.
       (e) No Discretion.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed 
     to authorize the Secretary to exercise any direction, 
     supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of 
     instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational 
     institution or school participating in a program under this 
     Act.

     SEC. 10. EVALUATION.

       The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct 
     an evaluation of the program authorized by this Act. Such 
     evaluation shall, at a minimum--
       (1) assess the implementation of educational choice 
     programs assisted under this Act and their effect on 
     participants, schools, and communities in the school 
     districts served, including parental involvement in, and 
     satisfaction with, the program and their children's 
     education;
       (2) compare the educational achievement of participating 
     eligible children with the educational achievement of similar 
     non-participating children before, during, and after the 
     program; and
       (3) compare--
       (A) the educational achievement of eligible children who 
     use scholarships to attend schools other than the schools the 
     children would attend in the absence of the program; with
       (B) the educational achievement of children who attend the 
     schools the children would attend in the absence of the 
     program.

     SEC. 11. ENFORCEMENT.

       (a) Regulations.--The Secretary shall promulgate 
     regulations to enforce the provisions of this Act.
       (b) Private Cause.--No provision or requirement of this Act 
     shall be enforced through a private cause of action.

     SEC. 12. FUNDING.

       The Committee on Finance and the Committee on 
     Appropriations of the Senate and the Committee on Ways and 
     Means and the Committee on Appropriations of the House of 
     Representatives shall identify wasteful spending (including 
     loopholes to revenue raising tax provisions) by the Federal 
     Government as a means of providing funding for this Act. Not 
     later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the committees referred to in the preceding sentence shall 
     jointly prepare and submit to the Majority and Minority 
     Leaders of the Senate and the Speaker and Minority Leader of 
     the House of Representatives, a report concerning the 
     spending (and loopholes) identified under such sentence.

     SEC. 13. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Charter school.--The term ``charter school'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 10310 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (as redesignated in section 
     3(g) of Public Law 105-278; 112 Stat. 2687).
       (2) Elementary school; local educational agency; parent; 
     secondary school; state educational agency.--The terms 
     ``elementary school'', ``local educational agency'', 
     ``parent'', ``secondary school'', 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).
       (3) Poverty line.--The term ``poverty line'' means the 
     poverty line (as defined by the Office of Management and 
     Budget, and revised annually in accordance with section 
     673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 
     9902(2))) applicable to a family of the size involved.
       (4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Education.
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. McCAIN (for himself, Mr. Brownback, and Mr. Jeffords):
  S. 718. A bill to direct the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology to establish a program to support research and training in 
methods of detecting the use of performance-enhancing drugs by 
athletes, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, 
Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I am joined by my colleagues, Senators 
Brownback and Jeffords, today in introducing the Amateur Sports 
Integrity Act. This bill does two things: it amends the Ted Stevens 
Olympic and Amateur Sports Act to make it illegal to gamble on Olympic, 
college, and high school sports, and it authorizes appropriations for 
the National Institute of Standards and Technology to fund the 
detection and prevention of athletic performance-enhancing drugs.
  This bill implements a recommendation made by the congressionally 
created National Gambling Impact Study Commission. In the summary of 
its comprehensive report to Congress dated June 1999, the Commission 
noted that ``There is growing concern regarding increasing levels of 
sports wagering by adolescents in high school and by young adults on 
college campuses. A 1996 study sponsored by the National Collegiate 
Athletic Association found that of the over 200 student athletes 
surveyed in Division I basketball and football programs, 25.5 percent 
admitted betting on college sports events while in school.''
  In its report, the NGISC recommended that betting on collegiate and 
amateur athletic events that is currently legal be banned altogether. 
The bill that we are introducing today does just that. Just as the use 
of performance enhancing drugs threatens the integrity of amateur 
sports, so does gambling. Betting on amateur athletics invites public 
speculation as to their legitimacy and transforms student athletes into 
objects to be bet upon. Adding unwarranted pressure from corrupting 
influences to the pressures that these intensely competitive young 
people already feel is unacceptable. Congress must act to close the 
loophole that currently allows one state to serve as a national 
clearinghouse for betting on our youth.

[[Page S3544]]

  Let me make one thing clear: Although the Amateur Sports Integrity 
Act bans legal gambling on amateur athletics, I expect that it also 
will reduce a substantial amount of illegal gambling as well. The 
relationship between legal and illegal gambling was addressed by the 
NGISC, which observed that ``legal sports wagering--especially the 
publication in the media of Las Vegas and offshore-generated point 
spreads fuels a much larger amount of illegal sports wagering.'' I 
won't pretend, however, that closing the one-state loophole on legal 
gambling on amateur sports will put an end to illegal gambling on these 
athletes and competitions. For this reason, I say to my colleagues who 
are backing a bill that has the support of the gaming industry and that 
provides additional resources to combat illegal gambling--I agree with 
the intent of your legislation and appreciate your recognition that 
gambling on amateur athletics is a problem that must be addressed at 
the federal level. That bill, however, while perhaps acceptable as a 
complement, is not acceptable as an alternative to the Amateur Sports 
Integrity Act.
  Mr. President, in its report the NGISC recommended that all students 
should be warned of the dangers of gambling, from the time they are in 
elementary school to when they finish college. As the Commission 
concluded, the loophole that currently encourages gambling by, and on, 
these young people, should be closed. The bill we are introducing today 
codifies the NGISC recommendation, and further ensures the integrity of 
amateur sports by addressing athlete doping. I urge my colleagues to 
support its swift passage.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I am pleased to reintroduce today with 
Senator McCain, the Amateur Sports Integrity Act. This legislation 
combats performance enhancing drugs use by athletes, as well as the 
corruptive influence of legal gambling on high school, college, and 
amateur sports. I would like to thank my colleague for his continued 
interest in and leadership on this issue. I look forward to winning an 
up or down vote on this bill this Congress.
  The Amatuer Sports Integrity Act serves two purposes. First, it 
combats the use of performance enhancing drugs by athletes through the 
creation a new grant program to be administered by the National 
Institute of Science and Technology. This program will support research 
on the use of performance-enhancing drugs, and methods of detecting 
their use. Quite simply, Mr. President, we need to find out who's 
cheating and how they're doing it so we can disqualify their 
dishonorable efforts to compete. The Act will achieve this goal.
  Our legislation will also ban the continued and unseemly practice of 
legal wagering on high school, college, and amateur sports at the 
expense of the achievements of our nation's student and amateur 
athletes. This bill closes the loophole in the Professional and Amateur 
Sports Protection Act that allows legal sports betting in Nevada to 
negatively impact student athletics in other states.
  This bill is supported by the National Collegiate Athletic 
Association, which represents more than 1000 colleges and universities 
nationwide. In addition, numerous coaches among the college ranks 
support this effort, and I can think of no better advocate then the 
coaches who spend time day in and day out with the athletes and prized 
sporting institutions negatively affected by legal sports gambling.
  My continuing efforts on this issue are in direct response to the 
recommendation made by the National Gambling Impact Study Commission 
(NGISC), which in 1999 concluded a two-year study on the impact of 
legalized gambling in our country. The Commission's recommendation 
called for a complete ban on all legalized gambling on amateur sports.
  The Commission in its report recognized the potential harm of 
legalized gambling by stating that sports gambling ``can serve as a 
gateway behavior for adolescent gamblers, and can devastate individuals 
and careers.'' This Amateur Sports Integrity Act will serve notice that 
betting on college games or amateur athletics is not only inappropriate 
but can result in these significant social costs.
  Legislation addressing illegal gambling has been introduced in the 
House and Senate by members of the Nevada delegation. I would like to 
take a moment to commend my colleagues, Senators Reid and Ensign, for 
recognizing that the social consequences of gambling for the public 
must be addressed. I agree with the Nevada delegation that we should be 
vigilant in our efforts to increase our knowledge regarding illegal 
gambling activities, and find ways to help law enforcement combat such 
activities. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee to which that 
bill has been referred, I look forward to working with the Nevada 
delegation to improve the bill and, ultimately, support its passage.
  However, we must also address the fact that legal gambling has a real 
and telling impact on high school, college, and amateur athletics and 
the public, and in fact facilitates illegal gambling activity. If there 
are any doubts, just ask Kevin Pendergast who orchestrated the 
basketball point-shaving scandal at Northwestern University. He had 
stated that he never would have been able to pull off his scheme if it 
weren't for the ability to lay a large amount of money on the Las Vegas 
sports books.
  The frequency of point shaving scandals over the last decade, and the 
tie-in to the Vegas sports books of the episodes at Northwestern and 
Arizona State is a clear indication that legal gambling on college 
sports stretches beyond Nevada, impacting the integrity of other 
state's sporting events. The now familiar opposition to this bill on 
the theory of states rights simply does not hold water, and I 
categorically reject the notion that Kansas college athletics should be 
jeopardized so the casinos in Vegas can rake in some additional 
gambling revenues.
  Mr. President, I encourage my colleagues to cosponsor the Amateur 
Sports Integrity Act and I look forward to a vote before the full 
Senate.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WELLSTONE (for himself, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Clinton, and Ms. 
        Cantwell):
  S. 719. A bill to amend Federal election law to provide for clean 
elections funded by clean money; to the Committee on Rules and 
Administration.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, the Senate this week took a historic 
step toward fairer elections. I was proud to join a solid majority of 
my colleagues in voting for the McCain-Feingold bill. However, passage 
of that bill is not the end of the reform debate, but hopefully merely 
a beginning.
  It is clear to me that we need to go still further to reform our 
elections comprehensively, and for that reason I rise today along with 
Senators Kerry, Clinton and Cantwell to re-introduce ``Clean Money, 
Clean Elections'' campaign finance reform legislation.
  Debates about campaign finance reform should be debates about who is 
at the table and how to level the playing field. Looking back at the 
two weeks of debate on McCain-Feingold from this perspective highlights 
the importance of and also the severe limitations of the bill. I say 
importance of the bill, because if you believe that reform of our 
federal elections is essential for the reasons I believe, restoring the 
centrality of one person, one vote, then you need to get soft money out 
of the system since it allows too much political power to flow from too 
few. I say severe limitations of the bill because even if we ban soft 
money and sham issue ads, we will still have too much money in American 
politics. And, the wealthy investors will still have an all too 
prominent role in our elections.
  Fundamentally, we need to go beyond legislation that merely seeks to 
patch a badly broken system. The McCain-Feingold legislation seeks to 
stop a leak here, and block a loophole there. It does not eliminate 
private, special interest money flowing to candidates and parties. The 
Clean Money, Clean Elections legislation that I am reintroducing today 
will fix this problem--it will reduce the costs of campaigns and 
provide public funds to eliminate the dependence on wealthy investors 
entirely. Hence the Clean Money, Clean Elections legislation will truly 
level the playing field for all candidates and ensure fair elections.
  Now that the Senate will finally go on record in favor of the modest 
reform that McCain-Feingold represents, I believe the time is right to 
begin the fight for fundamental reform: public financing of elections.

[[Page S3545]]

  The Clean Money, Clean Elections bill is the ``gold standard'' of 
true campaign finance reform, against which any more modest legislation 
ought to be assessed. The conceptual approach it embodies, replacing 
special interest money in our current system with clean money, is being 
adopted by state legislatures and in referenda across the country.
  In Maine, for example, there was broad participation in the Clean 
Money, Clean Elections program during the last election with 116 out of 
352 general election candidates both Republicans and Democrats 
participating. In Maine, Arizona and Vermont, Clean Money, Clean 
Elections reduced the influence of special interest money and provided 
a level playing field by offering qualified candidates a limited and 
equal amount of public funds. The earliest indications from Maine's 
first election under the Clean Elections law do inspire hope. Far more 
candidates than expected stepped forward to seek Clean Elections 
financing, and all but one succeeded in qualifying. There comments 
about the process tell us we are on the right track. Some of their 
comments are for example: ``Without Clean Elections I couldn't even 
think about running for office. I just couldn't afford it.'' said 
Shlomit Auciello, democrat challenger; ``The main reason I did it was 
that this is what people want.'' Chester Chapman, Republican 
challenger; ``I spent a lot of kitchen table time explaining the system 
to people. Once they knew what it was they really liked it. They like 
that it means no soft money and no PAC money will be used. I want to 
work for the people of Maine and I don't want to be beholden to anyone 
else.'' Glenn Cummings, Democrat challenger; ``It will definitely 
change some things. For one thing I will have about half the amount of 
money I raised last time but much more time to talk with people which 
is a good thing.'' Gabrielle Carbonear; and ``We have an obligation to 
put into practice the system that was approved by voters in 1996. Maine 
is in the lead in this area. It will only work if it is used, and it is 
important for incumbents to embrace it. Also, the Clean Election Act is 
making it easier to recruit candidates to run for office.'' Rick 
Bennet, Republic incumbent, Assistent Senate Minority Leader and a 
candidate for reelection.
  When asked, 60 percent of Americans say they think that reforming the 
way campaigns are financed should be a high priority on our National 
agenda. There is no question in my mind that these people are right, 
reforming the way campaigns are financed should be, must be, a high 
priority.
  Many people believe our political system is corrupted by special 
interest money. I agree with them. It is not a matter of individual 
corruption. I think it is probably extremely rare that a particular 
contribution causes a member to cast a particular vote. But the special 
interest money is always there, and I believe that we do suffer under 
what I have repeatedly called a systemic corruption. Unfortunately, 
this is no longer a shocking announcement, even if it is a shocking 
fact. Money does shape what is considered do-able and realistic here in 
Washington. It does buy access. We have both the appearance and the 
reality of systemic corruption. And we must act. Here in the Senate, we 
must push forward this spring on tough, comprehensive reform.

  I wonder if anyone would bother to argue that our budget debates are 
unaffected by the connection of big special-interest money to politics? 
The budget cuts proposed most deeply affect those who are least well 
off, while the tax cuts proposed mostly go to the wealthy. That is 
well-documented. The tax breaks we offer benefit not only the most 
affluent as a group, but numerous very narrow wealthy special 
interests. Does anyone wonder why we retain massive subsidies and tax 
expenditures for oil and pharmaceutical companies? What about tobacco? 
Are they curious why we promote a health care system dominated by 
insurance companies? Or why we promote a version of ``free trade'' 
which disregards the need for fair labor and environmental standards, 
for democracy and human rights, and for lifting the standard of living 
of American workers, as well as workers in the countries we trade with? 
How is it that we pass major legislation that directly promotes the 
concentration of ownership and power in the telecommunications 
industry, in the agriculture and food business, and in banking and 
securities? For the American people, how this happens, I think, is no 
mystery.
  I think most citizens believe there is a connection between big 
special interest money and outcomes in American politics. People 
realize what is ``on the table'' or what is considered realistic here 
in Washington often has much to do with the flow of money to parties 
and to candidates. We must act to change this.
  We must act to change this because too many people have lost faith in 
the system. People are turning away from the political process. They 
are surrendering what belongs most exclusively to them, their right to 
be heard on the issues that affect them, simply because they don't 
believe their voices will carry over the sound of all that cash. The 
degree of distrust, dissatisfaction, and outright hostility expressed 
by the American people when asked about the political process 
overwhelms me.
  We must act on comprehensive campaign finance reform. We must act to 
restore Americans' trust in our political process. We must act to renew 
their hope in the capacity of our political system to respond to our 
society's most basic problems and challenges. We must act to provide a 
channel for the anger that many Americans feel about the current 
system, and acknowledge the grassroots reform movement that's been 
building for years. These are our duties, and we must act to move the 
reform debate forward.
  As Members of Congress, most pressing for us should be the question 
of why so many people no longer trust the political process, especially 
here in Congress, and what we can do to restore that trust. Polls and 
studies continue to show a profound distrust of Congress, and of our 
process. Many Americans see the system as inherently corrupt, and they 
despair of making any real changes because they figure special 
interests have the system permanently rigged.
  Too many Americans believe that a small but wealthy and powerful 
elite controls the levers of government through a political process 
which rewards big donors, a system in which you have to pay to play. 
Why do you think corporate welfare has barely been nicked, but welfare 
for the poor and needy in this country has been gutted? The not-so-
invisible hand of corporate PACs and well-heeled lobbyists, and huge 
corporate soft money contributions can be seen most openly here.
  Too many Americans see our failures: to alleviate the harsh poverty 
that characterizes the lives of far too many of our inner-city 
residents; to reduce the widening gulf between rich and poor; to combat 
homelessness, drug addiction, decaying infrastructure, rising health 
care costs, and an unequal system of education.
  And they want to know why we can't, or won't, act to address these 
problems head-on. Americans understand that without real reform, 
attempts to restructure our health care system, create jobs and rebuild 
our cities, protect our environment, make our tax system fairer and 
more progressive, fashion and energy policy that relies more on 
conservation and renewable sources, and solve other pressing problems 
will remain frustrated by the pressures of special interests and big-
money politics.
  In thinking about reform legislation, I start with the premise that 
political democracy has several basic requirements: First, free and 
fair elections. It is hard to argue plausibly that we have them now. 
That's why people stay home on election day, why they don't participate 
in the process. Incumbents outspend challengers 8 or 10-1, and special 
interests buy access to Congress itself, all of which warps and 
distorts the democratic process.
  Second, the consent of the people. The people of this country, not 
special interest big money, should be the source of all political 
power. Government must remain the domain of the general citizenry, not 
a narrow elite.
  Third, political equality. Everyone must have equal opportunity to 
participate in the process of government. This means that the values 
and preferences of all citizens, not just those who can get our 
attention by waving large campaign contributions in front

[[Page S3546]]

of us, must be considered in the political debate. One person, one 
vote--no more and no less--the most fundamental of democratic 
principles.
  Each of these principles is undermined by our current system, funded 
largely through huge private contributions. Contributions that come 
with their own price tag attached--greater access and special 
consideration when push comes to shove. It's time for real reform.

  Which is why I stand here today, re-introducing the ``Clean Money, 
Clean Elections'' legislation that we introduced during the last 
Congress. We have tightened and strengthened some of the nuts and bolts 
of the legislation, but it is much the same bill that it was when we 
first introduced it: simple and sweeping, fundamental campaign finance 
reform.
  Money has always played a role in American politics and campaign 
spending is not a new problem, but it has exploded during the 1990s. In 
the 1993-94 election cycle, the national political parties raised 
$101.6 million dollars in soft money contributions. By the 1997-98 
election cycle that figure was up to $224.4 million dollars in soft 
money. In the 99-2000 election cycle that figure more than doubled to 
more than $487.5 million.
  However, we must not forget that nearly 80 percent of the money spent 
on elections during the last cycle was hard money. All together, over 
$2.2 billion in hard money was raised by federal candidates and parties 
during the 2000 elections, a figure that dwarfs party soft money. 
Unfortunately, under McCain-Feingold, even more hard money will pour 
into our elections.
  Of all the money given to Congressional candidates, almost none 
represented the millions of Americans who are poor, or parents of 
public school children, or victimized by toxic dumping or agri-chemical 
contamination, or who are small bank depositors and borrowers, or 
people dependent on public housing, transportation, libraries, and 
hospitals. It is clear who is represented under the current system and 
who is shut out.
  During the last election, only 4 out of every 10,000 Americans made a 
contribution greater than $200. Only 232,000 Americans gave 
contributions of $1000 or more to federal candidates--one ninth of one 
percent of the voting age population. By raising the hard money limits 
in McCain-Feingold, the Senate voted to increase the amount of special 
interest money in politics and entrench candidates' dependence on a 
narrow, political, elite made up of wealthy individuals. This was step 
backward and it makes Clean Money reform all the more necessary.
  The bill I am introducing today strikes directly at the heart of the 
crisis in the current system of campaign finance: the only way for 
candidates of ordinary means to run for office and win is to raise vast 
sums of money from special interests, who in turn expect access and 
influence on public policy. Real campaign finance reform needs to 
restore a level playing field, open up federal candidacies to all 
citizens, end the perpetual money chase for Members of Congress, and 
limit the influence of special interest groups. This legislation does 
all of these things by offering: The strictest curbs on special-
interest money and influence. The ``Clean Money, Clean Elections'' 
legislation bans completely the use of ``soft money'' to influence 
elections, discourages electioneering efforts masquerading as non-
electoral ``issue ads,'' provides additional funding to clean money 
candidates targeted by independent expenditures, and most importantly, 
allows candidates to reject private contributions if they agree to 
participate in the clean money system of financing. The greatest 
reduction in the cost of campaigns. Because it eliminates the need for 
fundraising expenses and provides a substantial amount of free and 
discounted TV and/or radio time for Federal candidates, this 
legislation allows candidates to spend far less than ever before on 
their campaigns. The most competitive and fair election financing. By 
providing limited but equal funding for qualified candidates, and 
additional funding for clean money candidates if they are outspent by 
non-participating opponents, this legislation allows qualified 
individuals to run for office on a financially level playing field, 
regardless of their economic status or access to larger contributors. 
Right now, the system is wired for incumbents because they are 
connected to the connected. The big players, the heavy hitters, tend to 
be attracted to incumbents, becuase that is where the power lies. This 
bill would allow all citizens to compete equally in the Federal 
election process. And an end to the money chase, shorter elections, and 
stronger enforcement. ``Clean Money, Clean Elections'' campaign finance 
reform frees candidates and elected officials from the burden of 
continuous fundraising and thus allows public officials to spend their 
time on their real duties. In effect, it also shortens the length of 
campaigns, when the public is bombarded with broadcast ads and mass 
mailings, by limiting the period of time during which candidates 
receive their funding. Moreover it strengthens the enforcement and 
disclosure requirements in Federal campaigns.
  What I am proposing are fundamental changes, necessary changes if we 
hope to ever regain the public's confidence in the political process. 
This legislation is both simple to understand and sweeping in scope. As 
a voluntary system this bill is constitutional, and it effectively 
provides a level playing field for all candidates who are able to 
demonstrate a substantial base of popular support. ``Clean Money, Clean 
Elections'' strengthens American democracy by returning political power 
to the ballot box and by blocking special interests' ability to skew 
the system through large campaign contributions.
  Most importantly, this legislation attacks the root cause of a system 
founded on private special interest money, curing the disease rather 
than treating the symptoms. The issue is no longer one of tightening 
already existing campaign financing laws, no longer a question of 
what's legal and what's illegal. The real problem is that most of 
what's wrong with the current system is perfectly legal. Big money 
special interests know how to get around the letter of the law as it is 
now written. This current system of funding congressional campaigns is 
inherently anti-democratic and unfair. It creates untenable conflicts 
of interests and screens out many good candidates. By favoring the deep 
pockets of special interest groups, it tilts the playing field in a way 
that sidelines the vast majority of Americans. This legislation takes 
special interest out of the election process and replaces it with the 
public interest, returning our political process to the hallowed 
principle of one person, one vote.
  This week the Senate took an excellent, but limited, step forward. A 
complete overhaul of the financing of elections is required to fully 
restore the public confidence in our democracy. I believe the Clean 
Money approach is what is needed to get the job done.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HUTCHINSON (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Warner, Mr. 
        Enzi, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Frist, and Ms. Collins):
  S. 721. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a 
Nurse Corps and recruitment and retention strategies to address the 
nursing shortage, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pension.
  Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce the 
Nurse Employment and Education Development--or NEED Act--critical 
legislation to address the current and impending nursing shortages in 
our country. I am joined by Senators Mikulski, Warner, Enzi, Bingaman, 
Roberts, Frist and Collins.
  This year, the first order of business of the Aging Subcommittee, of 
which I am Chairman, was to hold a hearing on the nursing shortage and 
its impact on our health care delivery system. Recent nursing 
statistics paint a grim picture for the future of the nursing 
workforce, when millions of Baby Boomers will retire and place an 
unprecedented strain on the health care system. By the year 2020, it is 
projected that nursing needs will be unmet by at least 20 percent.
  This is in large part due to a shrinking pipeline. The average age of 
Registered Nurses is 43.3 years. Nurses under age 30 comprise less than 
10 percent of today's nurse workforce. Minorities, including men, 
remain a minuscule percentage of the workforce.

[[Page S3547]]

The cumulative effect of all this is that nurses and nurse faculty are 
retiring or leaving the profession at a rapid rate, and only a small 
number of nurses and nurse educators are taking their place.
  In my home state of Arkansas, 153 eligible nursing students were 
turned away in 1999 because of the lack of faculty to teach them. In 
the meantime, over 750 nursing vacancies have been reported by Arkansas 
hospitals, and I know that this trend is being experienced by many more 
health care providers across the state. What is happening in Arkansas 
is becoming a major issue across the country.
  The NEED Act builds on the programs currently in the Nurse Education 
Act and adds several new, innovative approaches to alleviate the 
nursing shortage. In the area of recruitment, the NEED Act establishes 
a Nurse Corps, which is essential to attracting able individuals into 
the nurse workforce to fill current and future health needs. In 
particular, the NEED Act expands the existing nurse loan repayment 
program under the Nurse Education Act and by adding scholarships for 
which nursing students can qualify in exchange for at least 2 years of 
service in a critical nurse shortage area or in a variety of health 
care facilities determined to have a shortage in nursing. In addition, 
the NEED Act adds nursing homes, home health agencies, public health 
departments and nurse management health centers to the list of eligible 
entities to fulfill this service requirement.
  Changing the image of nursing and promoting workforce diversity is 
another key recruiting factor to get people, especially young people, 
interested in nursing careers. The NEED Act provides funding for multi-
media campaigns at the federal and state level to reach out to 
individuals to encourage them to consider nursing as they make career 
choices.
  The NEED Act also provides grants for community partnerships to 
develop innovative nurse recruiting and retention strategies tailored 
to a particular community, and authorizes additional funding for 
workforce diversity grants already provided for under the Nurse 
Education Act.

  In order to strengthen the existing workforce, the NEED Act provides 
grant funding for: career ladder programs to facilitate educational 
advancement for individuals with existing nursing degrees or health 
care training; long-term care training for nurses who will inevitably 
be dealing with an older patient population; and nursing internships 
and residencies to meet the current demand for nurses with specialty 
training, be it in the ER or the labor and delivery room
  Finally, the NEED Act provides for a fast-track faculty development 
program, which seeks to encourage master's and doctoral students to 
rapidly complete their studies through loans and scholarships. We must 
realize that getting people into the pipeline will mean very little if 
we do not have the teachers to teach them. Individuals receiving 
financial assistance through the fast-track faculty program must agree 
to teach at an accredited school of nursing in exchange for this 
assistance.
  This is a bipartisan issue and it is becoming a nationwide concern. I 
hope that we can work together to successfully secure passage of the 
NEED Act and other meaningful solutions.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Nurse Employment and 
Education Development (NEED Act) be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 721

       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 ``Nursing Employment and 
     Education Development Act'' or the ``NEED Act''.

     SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT.

       (a) Nurse Corps Loan Repayment Program.--Section 846 of the 
     Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 297n) is amended by--
       (1) in subsection (a)(3), by inserting ``in a skilled 
     nursing facility, in a home health agency, in a public health 
     department, in a nurse-managed health center,'' after ``in a 
     public hospital,''; and
       (2) in subsection (g), by striking ``$5,000,000'' and all 
     that follows to the period and inserting ``$10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002 and $15,000,000 in 2003''.
       (b) Grant Programs.--Title VIII of the Public Health 
     Service Act (42 U.S.C. 296 et seq.) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

               ``PART H--NURSE CORPS SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM

     ``SEC. 851. NURSE CORPS SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     Nurse Corps Scholarship program (referred to in this section 
     as the `program') to provide scholarships to individuals 
     seeking nursing education in exchange for service from such 
     individuals in a critical nursing shortage area upon 
     completion of such education.
       ``(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the program is to assure 
     that--
       ``(1) an adequate supply of nurses, at all preparation 
     levels up to the doctoral level, are available to meet the 
     nursing needs in critical nursing shortage areas;
       ``(2) an adequate supply of nurse educators are available 
     to meet the nursing education needs of the Nation; and
       ``(3) preference will be given to the preparation of 
     minority nurses and individuals who demonstrate greatest 
     financial need for nursing and nurse faculty scholarships.
       ``(c) Critical Nursing Shortage Area.--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `critical nursing shortage 
     area' means--
       ``(A) an urban or rural area that the Secretary determines 
     is experiencing a nursing shortage;
       ``(B) a population that the Secretary determines has such a 
     shortage; or
       ``(C) a medical facility or other public or private 
     facility that the Secretary determines has a shortage.
       ``(2) Factors to consider.--In making a determination 
     regarding a critical nursing shortage area, the Secretary 
     shall the criteria in section 846 for not more than 12 
     months, and after such period, the following:
       ``(A) The ratio of available nurses to the number of 
     individuals in the area or population group.
       ``(B) The demonstrated need of a medical facility or other 
     public health facility in the area.
       ``(C) The presence of innovative retention strategies 
     utilized by eligible facilities.
       ``(d) Eligibility.--To be eligible for the program an 
     individual shall--
       ``(1) be accepted for enrollment, or be enrolled, as a 
     full- or part-time student in an accredited nursing program; 
     and
       ``(2) submit an application for the program; and
       ``(3) submit a written contract, at the time of submitting 
     the application, accepting payment of a scholarship in 
     exchange for providing the required service in a critical 
     nursing shortage area.
       ``(e) Preference.--In selecting individuals to participate 
     in the program, the Secretary shall give priority to any 
     application submitted by an individual--
       ``(1) who has characteristics that increase the probability 
     that the individual will continue to serve in a critical 
     nursing shortage area after the period of obligated service 
     is complete;
       ``(2) who has an interest in a practice area of nursing, 
     including teaching nursing, that has unmet needs; and
       ``(3) who is from a disadvantaged background or 
     demonstrates the greatest financial need.
       ``(f) Application.--The Secretary shall create an 
     application form for any individual desiring to participate 
     in the program, and include in such form--
       ``(1) a summary of the rights and liabilities of an 
     individual whose application is approved (and whose contract 
     is accepted) by the Secretary;
       ``(2) information respecting meeting a service obligation 
     through private practice under an agreement; and
       ``(3) any other information that the individual needs to 
     understand the program, including a statement of all factors 
     considered in approving applications for the program.
       ``(g) Contract.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall prepare a written 
     contract for the program that shall be provided to any 
     individual desiring to participate in the program at the time 
     that an application is provided to such individual.
       ``(2) Content.--The contract described in paragraph (1) 
     shall be an agreement between the Secretary and individual 
     that states that, subject to paragraph (3)--
       ``(A) the Secretary agrees to--
       ``(i) provide the individual with a scholarship in each 
     such school year or years for a period of years (not to 
     exceed 4 school years) determined by the individual, during 
     which period the individual is pursuing a course of study; 
     and
       ``(ii) accept the individual into the Corps (or for 
     equivalent service as otherwise provided in this section); 
     and
       ``(B) the individual agrees to--
       ``(i) accept provision of such a scholarship to the 
     individual;
       ``(ii) maintain enrollment in a course of study until the 
     individual completes the course of study;
       ``(iii) while enrolled in such course of study, maintain an 
     acceptable level of academic standing (as determined under 
     regulations of the Secretary by the educational institution 
     offering such course of study); and
       ``(iv) serve for required period of service equal to--

[[Page S3548]]

       ``(I) 1 year for each school year for which the individual 
     was provided a scholarship under the program, or
       ``(II) 2 years,

     whichever is greater, as a provider of nursing services in a 
     critical nursing shortage area to which he or she is assigned 
     by the Secretary as a member of the program, or as otherwise 
     provided in this section.
       ``(3) Limitation.--The contract described in paragraph (1) 
     shall contain a provision that any financial obligation of 
     the United States arising out of a contract entered into 
     under this section and any obligation of the individual which 
     is conditioned thereon, is contingent upon funds being 
     appropriated for scholarships under this section.
       ``(h) Payment.--
       ``(1) In general.--A scholarship provided to a student for 
     a school year under a written contract under the program 
     shall consist of--
       ``(A) payment to, or (in accordance with paragraph (2)) on 
     behalf of, the student of the amount of--
       ``(i) the tuition of the student in such school year; and
       ``(ii) all other reasonable educational expenses, including 
     fees, books, and laboratory expenses, incurred by the student 
     in such school year; and
       ``(B) payment to the student of a stipend of $400 per month 
     (adjusted in accordance with paragraph (3)) for each month 
     the student is enrolled.
       ``(2) Contract.--The Secretary may contract with an 
     educational institution, in which a participant in the 
     program is enrolled, for the payment to the educational 
     institution of the amounts of tuition and other reasonable 
     educational expenses described in paragraph (1)(A).
       ``(3) Monthly stipend.--The amount of the monthly stipend, 
     specified in paragraph (1)(B) and as previously adjusted (if 
     at all) in accordance with this paragraph, shall be increased 
     by the Secretary as the Secretary determines to be 
     reasonable.
       ``(i) Breach of Agreement.--
       ``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), if an 
     individual participates in the program under this section and 
     agrees to provide health services for a period of time in 
     consideration for receipt of an award of Federal funds for 
     education as a nurse, the following applies:
       ``(A) Failure regarding education.--The individual is 
     liable to the Federal Government for the amount of such award 
     (including amounts provided for expenses related to such 
     attendance), and for interest on such amount at the maximum 
     legal prevailing rate, if the individual--
       ``(i) fails to maintain an acceptable level of academic 
     standing in the nursing program (as indicated by the program 
     in accordance with requirements established by the 
     Secretary);
       ``(ii) is dismissed from the nursing program for 
     disciplinary reasons; or
       ``(iii) voluntarily terminates the nursing program.
       ``(B) Failure regarding service.--The individual is liable 
     to the Federal Government for the amount of such award 
     (including amounts provided for expenses related to such 
     attendance), and for interest on such amount at the maximum 
     legal prevailing rate, if the individual fails to provide 
     health services in accordance with the program for the 
     required time period.
       ``(2) Waiver or suspension of liability.--The Secretary 
     shall waive liability under paragraph (1) if compliance by 
     the individual with the agreement involved is impossible, or 
     would involve extreme hardship to the individual, and if 
     enforcement of the agreements with respect to the individual 
     or facility would be unconscionable.
       ``(j) Information of the Program.--The Secretary shall 
     distribute material regarding the program to junior and 
     senior high schools, community colleges, universities, and 
     schools of nursing. The Secretary shall encourage such 
     schools to disseminate such material to the students of such 
     schools.
       ``(k) Service Information.--The Secretary shall provide to 
     an individual who has participated in the program and is 
     nearing the conclusion of his or her service obligation, 
     information regarding other opportunities for nursing in 
     critical nursing shortage areas.
       ``(l) Report.--Not later than 18 months after the first 
     loan cycle, and annually thereafter, the Secretary shall 
     prepare and submit to Congress a report describing the 
     program, including statements regarding--
       ``(1) the number of enrollees, scholarship, and grant 
     recipients by year of study;
       ``(2) the number of graduates;
       ``(3) the amount of scholarship payments made for each of 
     tuition, stipends, and other expenses;
       ``(4) which educational institutions the scholar attended;
       ``(5) the number and placement location of the scholars;
       ``(6) the default rate and actions required;
       ``(7) the amount of outstanding default funds;
       ``(8) to the extent that can be determined, the reason for 
     the default;
       ``(9) the demographics of the individuals participating in 
     the scholarship program; and
       ``(10) recommendations for future modifications of the 
     scholarship program.
       ``(m) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002 and $15,000,000 for fiscal years 2003 and 
     2004.

                      ``PART I--NURSE RECRUITMENT

     ``SEC. 855. PUBLIC AWARENESS AND EDUCATION CAMPAIGN.

       ``(a) National Campaign.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall develop and 
     administer a comprehensive national multi-media public 
     education campaign to enhance the image of the nursing 
     profession, promote diversity in the workforce, encourage 
     individuals to enter the nursing profession, and encourage 
     career development for individuals in the nursing profession.
       ``(2) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this subsection, $5,0000,000 
     for fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.
       ``(b) State Campaigns.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award grants to 
     eligible entities to establish the multi-media campaigns 
     described in subsection (a) at a State level.
       ``(2) Definitions.--
       ``(A) Eligible entity.--The term `eligible entity' means a 
     professional State nursing association, State health care 
     provider association, school of nursing, and any other entity 
     that provides similar services or serves a like function.
       ``(B) State health care provider association.--The term 
     `State health care provider association' means a professional 
     association of hospitals, nursing homes, home health care 
     agencies, hospices, consortia of said associations, or other 
     such entities deemed eligible by the Secretary.
       ``(3) Limitation.--An eligible entity that receives a grant 
     under this subsection shall not use funds received through 
     such grant to advertise particular employment opportunities 
     or recruit members or affiliates of such entity.
       ``(4) Application.--Each eligible entity that desires a 
     grant under this subsection shall submit an application to 
     the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing 
     such information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
       ``(5) Equitable broadcasting.--The campaigns described in 
     paragraph (1) shall be broadcast in such a manner as to 
     inform diverse populations throughout the State of nursing 
     opportunities, including rural populations.
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $5,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

     ``SEC. 856. AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTERS PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary shall award grants 
     to schools of nursing to expand the operation of area health 
     education centers under section 751 to work in communities to 
     develop models of excellence for school nurses, public health 
     nurses, perinatal outreach nurses, and other community-based 
     nurses, or to expand any junior and senior high school 
     mentoring programs to include a nurse mentoring program.
       ``(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $5,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

     ``SEC. 857. COMMUNITY NURSE OUTREACH GRANTS.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary, acting through 
     the Director of the Office of Rural Health Policy (of the 
     Health Resources and Services Administration) shall award 
     grants to community-based partnerships to establish programs 
     to recruit and retain nurses.
       ``(b) Community-based Partnerships.--The term `community-
     based partnerships' means a health care provider and a 
     community partner, such as a school, nursing program, faith-
     based organization, university, community college, public 
     health department, State health care provider association, 
     professional State nursing association, hospice care program 
     or other entity deemed eligible by the Secretary, that forms 
     a partnership with not less than 2 other entities in the 
     community to develop a network to recruit and retain nurses 
     in the community.
       ``(c) Priority.--In awarding grants under subsection (a), 
     the Secretary shall give priority to--
       ``(1) community-based partnerships seeking to recruit and 
     retain nurses in rural communities and medically underserved 
     urban communities, and other communities experiencing a 
     nursing shortage; and
       ``(2) community-based partnerships seeking to address such 
     needs as dependent care, transportation, or others as deemed 
     appropriate by the Secretary.
       ``(d) Application.--A community-based partnership seeking a 
     grant under this section shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

[[Page S3549]]

     ``SEC. 858. EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE IN NURSING REGARDING 
                   INDIVIDUALS FROM DIVERSE OR DISADVANTAGED 
                   BACKGROUNDS.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary shall award grants 
     to eligible entities to assist individuals from disadvantaged 
     backgrounds to pursue nursing education opportunities and 
     nursing career positions.
       ``(b) Eligible Entity.--In this section, the term `eligible 
     entity' has the same meaning given such term in section 
     801(1).
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a 
     grant under subsection (a) shall use funds received under 
     such grant to increase nursing education opportunities for 
     individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, including by 
     providing student scholarships, stipends, pre-entry 
     preparation, and retention activities.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

              ``PART J--STRENGTHENING THE NURSE WORKFORCE

     ``SEC. 861. GRANTS FOR CAREER LADDER PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary shall award grants 
     to eligible entities to develop programs that aid and 
     encourage individuals in nursing programs to pursue 
     additional nursing education and training.
       ``(b) Definitions.--
       ``(1) Eligible Entity.--The term `eligible entity' means a 
     school of nursing or a health care facility, or a partnership 
     of such school and facility.
       ``(2) Health care facility.--The term `health care 
     facility' means a hospital, nursing home, home health care 
     agency, hospice, federally qualified health center, federally 
     qualified community health center, rural health clinic, or 
     public health clinic.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a 
     grant under subsection (a) shall use such funds received 
     through such grant to--
       ``(1) provide career counseling to individuals seeking to 
     advance within the nursing profession;
       ``(2) promote career mobility for nursing personnel by 
     providing training in a variety of settings and specialty 
     training; and
       ``(3) develop programs to facilitate educational 
     advancement for individuals with existing degrees or health 
     care training.
       ``(d) Application.--An eligible entity seeking a grant 
     under subsection (a) shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such a manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

     ``SEC. 862. GRANTS FOR NURSE TRAINING.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary shall award grants 
     to eligible entities to encourage individuals to enter the 
     nursing profession with a focus on providing long-term care.
       ``(b)(1) Eligible entity.--The term `eligible entity' means 
     a school of nursing or a health care facility, or a 
     partnership of such school and facility.
       ``(2) Health care facility.--The term `health care 
     facility' means a hospital, nursing home, home health care 
     agency, hospice, federally qualified health center, federally 
     qualified community health center, rural health clinic, or 
     public health clinic.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a 
     grant under subsection (a) shall use such funds received 
     through such grant to--
       ``(1) provide education and training to individuals who 
     will provide long-term care; and
       ``(2) expand the enrollment in nursing programs, especially 
     programs that focus on training individuals in the provision 
     of long-term care.
       ``(d) Application.--An eligible entity seeking a grant 
     under subsection (a) shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such a manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

     ``SEC. 863. GRANTS FOR INTERNSHIP AND RESIDENCY PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary shall award grants 
     to an eligible entity to develop internship and residency 
     programs that encourage mentoring and the development of 
     specialties.
       ``(b) Definitions.--
       ``(1) Eligible Entity.--The term `eligible entity' means a 
     health care facility, or a partnership of a school of nursing 
     and health care facility.
       ``(2) Health care facility.--The term `health care 
     facility' means a hospital, nursing home, home health care 
     agency, hospice, federally qualified health center, federally 
     qualified community health center, rural health clinic, or 
     public health clinic.
       ``(c) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a 
     grant under subsection (a) shall use such funds received 
     through such grant to--
       ``(1) develop internship and residency programs and 
     curriculum and training programs for graduates of a nursing 
     program;
       ``(2) provide funding for faculty and mentors; and
       ``(3) provide funding for nurses participating in 
     internship and residency programs on both a full-time and 
     part-time basis.
       ``(d) Application.--An eligible entity seeking a grant 
     under subsection (a) shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such a manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
       ``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002, and such sums as may be necessary for 
     fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

                  ``PART K--NURSE FACULTY DEVELOPMENT

     ``SEC. 865. FAST-TRACK NURSING FACULTY LOAN PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to enter 
     into an agreement for the establishment and operation of a 
     student loan fund with any public or nonprofit private school 
     of nursing to aid masters or doctoral level students.
       ``(2) Limitation.--Assistance provided under paragraph (1) 
     for a part-time masters degree program shall be provided for 
     not more than 6 years and for a part-time doctoral degree 
     program for not more than 7 years.
       ``(b) Agreement.--Each agreement entered into under this 
     section shall--
       ``(1) provide for the establishment of a student loan fund 
     by the school;
       ``(2) provide for the deposit in the fund of Federal 
     contributions, additional amounts received from other 
     sources, collections of principal and interest on loans made 
     from the fund, and any other earnings of the fund;
       ``(3) provide that the fund shall only be used for loans to 
     students of the school in accordance with the agreement and 
     for costs of collection of such loans and interest thereon; 
     and
       ``(4) provide that the loan shall only be used to meet the 
     costs of projects that help individuals seek a masters degree 
     or a doctoral degree.
       ``(c) Limitations.--The total of the loans for any academic 
     year made by schools of nursing from loan funds established 
     pursuant to agreements under this section may not exceed 
     $35,000 in the case of any student. In the granting of such 
     loans, a school shall give preference to persons with 
     exceptional financial need.
       ``(d) Terms and Conditions of Loans.--Loans from any 
     student loan fund by any school shall be made on such terms 
     and conditions as the school may determine, subject to 
     limitations the Secretary may prescribe (by regulation or in 
     the agreement with the school) to prevent the impairment of 
     the capital of such fund while enabling the student to 
     complete his course of study, except that--
       ``(1) such a loan may be made only to a student who--
       ``(A) is in financial need of the amount of the loan to 
     pursue a full- or part-time course of study at the school to 
     obtain a masters degree with a concentration in education or 
     a doctoral degree; and
       ``(B) is capable, in the opinion of the school, of 
     maintaining good standing in such course of study;
       ``(2) such a loan shall be repayable in equal or graduated 
     periodic installments (with the right of the borrower to 
     accelerate repayment) over the 10-year period which begins 9 
     months after the student ceases to pursue a full- or part-
     time course of study at a school of nursing, excluding from 
     such 10-year period all--
       ``(A) periods (up to 3 years) of--
       ``(i) active duty performed by the borrower as a member of 
     a uniformed service; or
       ``(ii) service as a volunteer under the Peace Corps Act; 
     and
       ``(B) periods (up to 10 years) during which the borrower is 
     pursuing a full-time or half-time course of study in advanced 
     nursing education at a school of nursing;
       ``(3) the liability to repay the unpaid balance of such 
     loan and accrued interest thereon shall be canceled upon the 
     death of the borrower, or if the Secretary determines that 
     the borrower has become permanently and totally disabled;
       ``(4) such a loan shall bear interest on the unpaid balance 
     of the loan, computed only for periods during which the loan 
     is repayable, at the rate of 5 percent per annum;
       ``(5) such a loan shall be made without security or 
     endorsement, except that if the borrower is a minor and the 
     note or other evidence of obligation executed by the borrower 
     would not, under the applicable law, create a binding 
     obligation, either security or endorsement may be required;
       ``(6) no note or other evidence of any such loan may be 
     transferred or assigned by the school making the loan except 
     that, if the borrower transfers to another school 
     participating in the program, such note or other evidence of 
     a loan may be transferred to such other school;
       ``(7) any student receiving a loan shall agree to teach at 
     an accredited school of nursing for each year of assistance 
     after the masters or doctoral degree has been obtained; and
       ``(8) pursuant to uniform criteria established by the 
     Secretary, the repayment period established under paragraph 
     (2) for any student borrower who during the repayment period 
     failed to make consecutive payments

[[Page S3550]]

     and who, during the last 12 months of the repayment period, 
     has made at least 12 consecutive payments may be extended for 
     a period not to exceed 10 years.
       ``(e) Canceled Loan.--Where all or any part of a loan, or 
     interest, is canceled under this section, the Secretary shall 
     pay to the school an amount equal to the school's 
     proportionate share of the canceled portion, as determined by 
     the Secretary.
       ``(f) Payments.--Any loan for any year by a school from a 
     student loan fund established pursuant to an agreement under 
     this section shall be made in such installments as the 
     Secretary determines, and, upon notice to the Secretary by 
     the school that any recipient of a loan is failing to 
     maintain satisfactory standing, any or all further 
     installments of the loans shall be withheld, as may be 
     appropriate.
       ``(g) Charges.--Subject to regulations of the Secretary and 
     in accordance with this section, a school shall assess a 
     charge with respect to a loan from the loan fund established 
     pursuant to an agreement under this section for failure of 
     the borrower to pay all or any part of an installment when it 
     is due and, in the case of a borrower who is entitled to 
     deferment of the loan under subsection (d)(2), for any 
     failure to file timely and satisfactory evidence of such 
     entitlement. No such charge may be made if the payment of 
     such installment or the filing of such evidence is made 
     within 60 days after the date on which such installment or 
     filing is due. The amount of any such charge may not exceed 
     an amount equal to 6 percent of the amount of such 
     installment. The school may elect to add the amount of any 
     such charge to the principal amount of the loan as of the 
     first day after the day on which such installment or evidence 
     was due, or to make the amount of the charge payable to the 
     school not later than the due date of the next installment 
     after receipt by the borrower of notice of the assessment of 
     the charge.
       ``(h) Repayment.--Upon application by a person who received 
     and is under an obligation to repay, any loan made under this 
     section, the Secretary may repay (without liability to the 
     applicant) all or a part of such loan, and any interest or 
     portion outstanding, if the applicant--
       ``(1) failed to complete the nursing studies with respect 
     to which such loan was made;
       ``(2) is in exceptionally needy circumstances; and
       ``(3) has not resumed, or cannot reasonably be expected to 
     resume, such nursing studies within 2 years following the 
     date upon which the applicant terminated the studies with 
     respect to which such loan was made.
       ``(i) Applications.--The Secretary shall from time to time 
     set dates by which schools of nursing must file applications 
     for Federal capital contributions.
       ``(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $10,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2002 and $15,000,000 for fiscal years 2003 and 
     2004.

     ``SEC. 866. STIPEND AND SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a 
     scholarship and stipend program to encourage individuals to 
     seek a masters degree or a doctoral degree at a school of 
     nursing.
       ``(2) Limitation.--Assistance provided under paragraph (1) 
     for a part-time masters degree program shall be provided for 
     not more than 6 years and for a part-time doctoral degree 
     program not more than 7 years.
       ``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a scholarship 
     or stipend under this section, an individual shall--
       ``(1) submit an application to the Secretary at such time, 
     in such manner, and containing such information as the 
     Secretary may reasonably require;
       ``(2) enter into an agreement with the Secretary to accept 
     the scholarship in consideration for remaining enrolled in a 
     nursing school and teaching at an accredited school of 
     nursing for 1 year for each year of assistance with a course 
     load determined by the school of nursing where the teaching 
     will take place.
       ``(c) Application.--The Secretary shall disseminate 
     application forms to individuals and in such forms, include--
       ``(1) a summary of the rights and liabilities of an 
     individual whose application is approved by the Secretary; 
     and
       ``(2) information respecting meeting the service obligation 
     described in subsection (b)(2).
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, 
     $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2002 and $15,000,000 for fiscal 
     years 2003 and 2004.

            ``PART L--NATIONAL COMMISSION ON NURSING CRISIS

     ``SEC. 871. NATIONAL COMMISSION ON NURSING CRISIS.

       ``(a) In General.--There is established a commission known 
     as the National Commission on the Nursing Crisis (referred to 
     in this section as the `Commission').
       ``(b) Duties.--The Commission shall meet at least four 
     times and shall study and make recommendations to the 
     appropriate committees of Congress regarding--
       ``(1) agency initiatives and legislative actions that are 
     necessary to address the nursing shortage in the short and 
     long term;
       ``(2) nurse training, nurse recruitment, retention of 
     nurses, workplace issues for nurses, funding for nursing 
     programs in this Act and the Social Security Act, and 
     infrastructure issues;
       ``(3) the facilitation of career advancement within the 
     nursing profession;
       ``(4) attracting middle and high school students into 
     nursing careers;
       ``(5) nurse education issues; and
       ``(6) the effectiveness of current nursing recruitment and 
     retention programs, and what changes might be needed.
       ``(c) Membership.--Not later than 3 months after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Comptroller General shall 
     appoint members of the Commission (taking into account rural 
     and urban areas, geographic diversity, and the diversity of 
     the patient population within such areas) which shall be 
     composed of 19 members of whom--
       ``(1) at least \2/3\ of such members shall be nurses and 
     nursing assistants with different levels of education, and a 
     significant portion of such shall be currently practicing as 
     nurses; and
       ``(2) the other portion of such members shall be--
       ``(A) representatives of schools of nursing;
       ``(B) nursing students;
       ``(C) representatives of primary and secondary schools;
       ``(D) representatives of the Departments of Health and 
     Human Services and Education;
       ``(E) representatives of public health departments;
       ``(F) representatives of employers and facilities, such as 
     hospitals, long term care facilities, and home health 
     agencies;
       ``(G) patients and representatives of patients;
       ``(H) representatives of professional nursing associations;
       ``(I) representatives of health plans or health insurance 
     issuers;
       ``(J) union representatives who are nurses; and
       ``(K) representatives of other health care provider groups.
       ``(d) Chairperson.--The Secretary shall serve as the 
     chairperson of the Commission.
       ``(e) Subcommittees.--The Chairperson shall have the 
     authority to create subcommittees as the Chairperson 
     determines is necessary.
       ``(f) Staff.--The Secretary shall provide any staff that 
     the Commission shall require.
       ``(g) Quorum.--Nine members of the Commission shall 
     constitute a quorum.
       ``(h) Vacancies.--Any vacancy in the Commission shall not 
     affect the powers of the Commission, but shall be filled in 
     the same manner as the original appointment and shall be made 
     not later than 30 days after the date on which the Commission 
     is given notice of such vacancy.
       ``(i) Compensation.--Members of the Commission shall 
     receive no additional compensation by reason of their service 
     to the Commission. Each member shall be allowed travel 
     expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates 
     authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of 
     chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from 
     their homes or regular places of business in the performance 
     of services for the Commission.
       ``(j) Report.--Not later than 15 months after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Commission shall prepare and 
     submit to Congress and the Secretary, a report that makes the 
     recommendations described in subsection (b) and reports on 
     any best practices that such Commission determines.
       ``(k) Sunset.--This section shall be effective for 15 
     months from the date of enactment of this section.
       ``(l) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section, 
     $500,000 for fiscal year 2002.''.

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, we are in the midst of a nursing workforce 
shortage. Not only are fewer people entering and staying in the nursing 
profession, but we are losing nurses at a time of growing need. Today, 
nurses are needed in a greater number of settings, such as nursing 
homes, extended care facilities, community and public health settings, 
nursing education, and ambulatory care settings. Nationally, health 
care providers, ranging from hospitals and nursing homes to home health 
agencies and public health departments are struggling to find qualified 
nurses to provide safe, efficient quality care for their patients.
  Though we have faced nursing shortages in the past, this shortage is 
particularly troublesome because it reflects two trends that are 
occurring simultaneously: (1) a shortage of people entering the 
profession and (2) the retirement of nurses who have been working in 
the profession for many years. Over the past 5 years, enrollment in 
entry-level nursing programs has declined by 20%, mirroring the 
declining awareness of the nursing profession among high school 
graduates. Consequently, nurses under the age of 30 represent only 10% 
of the current workforce; and by 2010, 40% of the nursing workfoce will 
be over the age of 50 and nearing retirement. If these trends are not 
reversed, we stand to lost vast numbers of nurses at the vert time that 
they will be needed to care for the millions of baby boomers reach 
retirement age.

[[Page S3551]]

  Further, greater efforts must be made to recruit more men and 
minorities to this noble profession. Currently, only 10% of the 
registered nurses in the United States are from racial or ethnic 
minority backgrounds, even though these individuals comprise 28% of the 
total United States population. In 2000, only 5.9% of the registered 
nurses were men. We must work to promote diversity in the workforce, 
not only to increase the number of individuals within the profession 
but also to promote culturally competent and relevant care.
  Even if nursing schools could recruit more students to deal with the 
shortage, many schools could not accommodate higher enrollments because 
of faculty shortages. There are nearly 400 faculty vacancies at nursing 
schools in this country. And, an even greater faculty shortage looms in 
the next 10-15 years as many current nursing faculty approach 
retirement and fewer nursing students pursue academic careers.
  Therefore, I am pleased to join Senator Hutchinson in introducing the 
Nursing Employment and Education Development (NEED) Act to expand 
current programs addressing the increasing number of settings which 
rely on nurses to provide care, to attract young people to the nursing 
profession, and to promote career mobility. The NEED Act complements 
legislation that I am developing as Chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Public Health--the reauthorization of the National Health Service Corps 
(NHSC). The NHSC, a program designed to address the geographic 
maldistribution of health professionals, cannot be the only solution 
sought to deal with our nursing shortage. Initiatives like the NEED Act 
are also a critical component of a comprehensive strategy to address 
this growing problem.
  Specifically, the NEED Act will develop a national Nurse Corps 
Program that will allow nurses to receive scholarships and loan 
repayment assistance for agreeing to serve at least two years in 
nursing homes, home health agencies, public health departments, health 
centers, public hospitals, or rural health clinics. This program 
expansion more accurately address the number of settings affected by 
the nursing shortage and allows for stronger recruitment efforts for 
disadvantaged students.
  The bill will also help to attract young people to the profession by 
funding a multi-media, public campaign to enhance the image of the 
nursing profession, promote diversity in the workforce, and encourage 
career development for those already in the profession. The NEED Act 
further promotes community involvement by providing community outreach 
grants to providers and community partners to develop and implement 
creative strategies for nurse recruitment and retention. The bill also 
expands the Area Health Education Centers program to enhance 
recruitment and retention of nurses in rural areas.
  The NEED Act promotes career mobility by expanding career ladder 
programs and encouraging individuals to pursue advanced education 
through available scholarships and stipends. The bill also authorizes a 
Fast-Track Nursing Faculty Scholarships and Loan Program--a program 
providing scholarships, loans, and monthly stipends to college 
graduates and master's students to allow full-time study and faster 
completion of doctoral studies. To assist nursing schools in preparing 
those students, the NEED Act provides needed funding for long-tern care 
training and for internship or residency programs to encourage 
mentoring and the development of subspecialists.
  The NEED Act will help assure a strong and vibrant nursing workfoce, 
allowing us to avoid the harmful effects of a long-term nursing 
shortage. I appreciate Senator Hutchinson's work on this issue, and I 
am pleased to join him to day to introduce a bill that represents an 
important and thoughtful response to this pressing issue.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to join with my colleague, 
Senator Tim Hutchinson, today to introduce the Nursing Employment and 
Education Development or ``NEED'' Act. This bill is sorely needed, 
because we have a nursing shortage. In Maryland, 15% of the nursing 
jobs are vacant. Last year, it took an average of 68 days to fill a 
nurse vacancy, and we need about 1,600 more full-time nurses to fill 
those vacancies. There were 2,000 fewer nurses in Maryland in 1999 than 
there were in 1998. The shortage exists across the United States, and 
will get worse in the future. Nationwide, we will need 1.7 million 
nurses by the year 2020, but only about 600,000 will be available.
  We depend on nurses every day to care for millions of Americans, 
whether in a hospital, nursing home, health center, hospice, or through 
home health. They are the backbone of our health care system. If we 
don't effectively address the crisis in nursing, those hospitals, 
nursing homes and clinics will soon be on life support.
  This bill is a downpayment. It doesn't address the fact that nurses 
are underpaid, overworked, and undervalued, but it does focus on 
education. The NEED Act seeks to help bring men and women into the 
nursing profession, and help them advance within it. The bill does this 
under five major approaches:

       Nurse Corps: Creates a Nurse Corps Scholarhip Program, 
     which provides scholarships in exchange for at least 2 years 
     of service in a critical nurse shortage area, authorizes 
     increased funding for the nursing education loan repayment 
     program,
       Nurse Recruitment and Retention:
       Creates a public awareness and education campaign, to be 
     carried out on the state and national level, to enhance the 
     image of nursing, promote diversity in the nursing workforce, 
     and encourage people to enter the nursing profession, enables 
     Area Health Education Centers (AHECs) to expand their junior 
     and senior high school mentoring programs for nurses and 
     develop ``models of excellence'' for community-based nurses, 
     creates networks between health care facilities and community 
     organizations that will recruit and retain nurses in the 
     community.
       Nurse Training: Creates ``career ladder'' programs that 
     will encourage nurses and nursing students to pursue 
     additional education and training and advance within the 
     profession, encourages students to enter the nursing 
     profession with a focus on long-term care develops internship 
     and residency programs that encourage mentoring and the 
     development of specialties such as labor and delivery and 
     emergency room nursing.
       Nursing Faculty Development: Provides scholarships and 
     loans for graduate-level education in nursing, to help ensure 
     that we have enough teachers at our nursing schools.
       National Commission on the Nursing Crisis: Creates a 
     National Commission on the Nursing Crisis, modeled after the 
     Maryland Commission on the Crisis in Nursing, which will 
     study and make recommendations to Congress within 1 year on 
     how to address the nursing shortage in the short and long 
     term.

  This bill is about nursing education, but it's also about 
empowerment. We can empower people to have a better life and go into a 
career to save lives.
  The bill will empower the single mom who has been working in a dead-
end retail job to forge a better life for herself and her family. It 
will help her get a scholarship to help pay for tuition, books, and lab 
fees, and by funding child care programs to help her balance work and 
family.
  The bill empower the nurse who has a baccalaureate degree, but wants 
to get a Master's degree so she can teach nursing at a community 
college. It will help her get loans, scholarships, and living stipends 
to pursue that degree.
  This bill also will fund partnerships between schools and health care 
providers to inspire the next generation of nurses. For example, a 12-
year old boy or girl in Suitland, Maryland who is interested in 
nursing, could like up with a ``buddy'' or mentor at the local 
hospital. That mentor could help the student with science homework, or 
even let the student ``shadow'' the mentor at work.
  It is important that we add these programs to the federal law books. 
But as a member of the Appropriations Committee, I know how important 
it is that we fund them and our existing programs in the federal 
checkbook. That's why I was disturbed to read in the newspaper 
yesterday that President Bush plans to cut funding for education and 
training programs for doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and other health 
professionals from $353 million to just $140 million. That's a cut of 
$213 million! Such a move would be penny-wise and pound-foolish.
  President Bush wants to slow the growth of federal spending, but he 
can't slow the growth of illness, or of our aging population. He adds 
money for community health centers, which I support. But who will staff 
them? Without nurses, more community health centers are a hollow 
opportunity. He adds more money for medical research at the National 
Institutes of Health, which I support. But he

[[Page S3552]]

doesn't fund the programs that will train the pharmacists who will 
dispense the medicines that come from that medical research, or a real 
Medicare prescription drug benefit so that seniors can afford them. 
Again, this is a hollow opportunity. I urge the President to 
reconsider, and the Congress to reject his approach.
  I hope to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
enhance opportunity for nurses and recruit new nurses into the 
profession by enacting this bill into law this year. Thank you.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. FRIST (for himself, Mr. Reed, and Mr. Lugar):
  S. 722. A bill to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to prohibit 
telemarketers from interfering with the caller identification service 
of any person to whom a telephone solicitation is made, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
  Mr. FRIST. 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. 722

       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 ``Telemarketer Identification 
     Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON INTERFERENCE WITH CALLER 
                   IDENTIFICATION SERVICES.

       (a) In General.--Section 227 of the Communications Act of 
     1934 (47 U.S.C. 227) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (e) and (f) as subsections 
     (f) and (g), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following new 
     subsection (e):
       ``(e) Prohibition on Interference With Caller 
     Identification Services.--
       ``(1) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person or 
     entity within the United States, in making any commercial 
     telephone solicitation, to interfere with or circumvent the 
     ability of a caller identification service to access or 
     provide to the recipient of the call the information about 
     the call (as required under the regulations issued under 
     paragraph (2)) that such service is capable of providing.
       ``(2) Regulations.--Not later than 18 months after the date 
     of the enactment of the Telemarketer Identification Act of 
     2001, the Commission shall prescribe regulations to implement 
     this subsection. The regulations shall--
       ``(A) require any person or entity making a commercial 
     telephone solicitation to make such solicitation in a manner 
     such that a recipient of such solicitation having a caller 
     identification service capable of providing such information 
     will be provided by such service with--
       ``(i) the name of the person or entity on whose behalf such 
     solicitation is being made, or the name of the person or 
     entity making the solicitation; and
       ``(ii) a valid and working telephone number at which the 
     person or entity making such solicitation or the person or 
     entity on whose behalf such solicitation was made may be 
     reached during regular business hours for the purpose of 
     requesting that the recipient of such solicitation be placed 
     on the do-not-call list required under section 64.1200 of the 
     Commission's regulations (47 CFR 64.1200) to be maintained by 
     the person making such solicitation; and
       ``(B) provide that any person or entity who receives a 
     request from a person to be placed on such do-not-call list 
     may not use such person's name and telephone number for any 
     other telemarketing purpose (including transfer or sale to 
     any other entity for telemarketing use) other than 
     enforcement of such list.
       ``(3) Private right of action.--A person or entity may, if 
     otherwise permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, 
     bring in an appropriate court of that State--
       ``(A) an action based on a violation of this subsection or 
     the regulations prescribed under this subsection to enjoin 
     such violation;
       ``(B) an action to recover for actual monetary loss from 
     such a violation, or to receive $500 in damages for each such 
     violation, whichever is greater; or
       ``(C) both such actions.

     If the court finds that the defendant willfully or knowingly 
     violated this subsection or the regulations prescribed under 
     this subsection, the court may, in its discretion, increase 
     the amount of the award to an amount equal to not more than 3 
     times the amount available under subparagraph (B).
       ``(4) Definitions.--In this subsection:
       ``(A) Caller identification service.--The term `caller 
     identification service' means any service or device designed 
     to provide the user of the service or device with the 
     telephone number of an incoming telephone call.
       ``(B) Telephone call.--The term `telephone call' means any 
     telephone call or other transmission which is made to or 
     received at a telephone number of any type of telephone 
     service. Such term includes calls made by an automatic 
     telephone dialing system, an integrated services digital 
     network, and a commercial mobile radio source.''.
       (b) Delayed Effective Date.--
       (1) In general.--The regulations prescribed by the Federal 
     Communications Commission under subsection (e) of section 227 
     of the Communications Act of 1934, as added by subsection 
     (a), shall take effect on the date that is two years after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Additional delay for good cause shown.--The Commission 
     may grant a wavier from compliance with the regulations 
     referred to in paragraph (1) for a period of not more than 24 
     months upon application (made at such time, in such form, and 
     containing such information as the Commission may require), 
     and after notice to the public and an opportunity for 
     comment, to any person who demonstrates to the satisfaction 
     of the Commission that--
       (A) it will comply with the regulations before the 
     expiration of the period of time for which the waiver is 
     requested;
       (B) without the requested waiver, timely compliance with 
     the regulations would be technically infeasible because of 
     technical problems associated with the telecommunications 
     equipment used by the applicant; and
       (C) replacement or upgrading of the telecommunications 
     equipment used by the applicant in order to comply with the 
     regulations in a timely manner without the waiver--
       (i) would impose an unduly onerous financial burden on the 
     applicant;
       (ii) is not feasible because the equipment, software, or 
     technical assistance necessary for the replacement or upgrade 
     is not available; or
       (iii) cannot be completed before the effective date of the 
     regulations.

     SEC. 3. EFFECT ON STATE LAW AND STATE ACTIONS.

       (a) Effect on State Law.--Subsection (f)(1) of section 227 
     of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227), as 
     redesignated by section 2 of this Act, is further amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``or'' at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; or''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) interfering with or circumventing caller 
     identification services.''.
       (b) Actions by States.--The first sentence of subsection 
     (g)(1) of such section 227, as so redesignated, is further 
     amended by inserting after ``this section,'' the following: 
     ``or has engaged or is engaging in a pattern or practice of 
     interfering with or circumventing caller identification 
     services of residents of that State in violation of 
     subsection (e) or the regulations prescribed under such 
     subsection,''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SPECTER (for himself, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Thurmond, Mr. 
        Chafee, Mr. Smith of Oregon, Mr. Hollings, Mr. Reid, Mrs. 
        Murray, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Corzine, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Kerry, 
        and Mr. Inouye):
  S. 723. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for 
human embryonic stem cell generation and research; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition today to 
introduce the ``Stem Cell Research Act of 2001.'' As chairman of the 
Senate appropriations subcommittee that funds medical research, my 
distinguished colleague, Senator Tom Harkin and I convened a series of 
seven hearings to learn more about an exciting medical discovery and 
the promise it holds. The source of this new hope is what scientists 
call ``stem cells.'' These are living cells which, in their earliest 
stages, have the ability to transform into any type of cell in the 
human body. If the scientists are correct, a stem cell implanted in a 
heart, for example, would become a healthy heart cell; if the same stem 
cell were implanted in a liver, it would grow into a healthy liver 
cell. It is this remarkable adaptability that leads scientists to 
believe that one day, stem cells could be transplanted to any part of 
the body to replace tissue that has been damaged by disease, injury or 
aging.
  A team of researchers also found that human embryonic stem cells that 
were injected into the spinal cords of monkeys stricken with Lou 
Gehrig's disease showed promising signs of movement. These early 
research findings indicate that stem cells hold hope for countless 
patients with cancer, Parkinson's, heart disease, Alzheimer's and 
spinal cord injury, just to name a few. These cells could become a 
veritable fountain of youth.
  What had been delaying the advancement of this new line of research 
is a provision in the Labor-HHS appropriations bill that prohibits 
research on

[[Page S3553]]

human embryos. In early 1999, the Department of Health and Human 
Services ruled that Federal researchers could conduct research on stem 
cell lines derived from private sources. I applaud the HHS ruling and 
encourage the NIH to review, on an expedited basis, the compliance 
applications they recently received. However, we have a duty to 
accelerate medical research by allowing researchers to utilize Federal 
funds to derive their own stem cells.
  Human embryonic stem cell research holds such potential for millions 
of Americans who are sick and in pain that we believe it is wrong for 
us to prevent or delay our world-class scientists from building on the 
progress that has been made.
  Our legislation creates one narrow and specific source for Federal 
researchers to obtain embryos for use in stem cell research: embryos 
which would otherwise be discarded from in-vitro fertilization clinics, 
with the expressed consent of the donating families. In addition, a 
provision is included which requires that all Federally-funded research 
must adhere to strict procedural and ethical guidelines to ensure that 
such research is conducted in an ethical, sound manner. It is important 
to note that as it stands today, embryonic stem cell research in the 
private sector is not subject to Federal monitoring or ethical 
requirements.
  I am pleased that my colleagues, Senators Thurmond, Chafee, G. Smith, 
Hollings, Reid, Murray, Clinton, Corzine, Feinstein, Kerry, and Inouye 
have joined me and Senator Harkin as original cosponsors of this vital 
legislative effort. I urge all of my colleagues to join us in 
supporting this important legislation that will give many Americans the 
promise to treat diseases that today are incurable.
  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. 723

       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 ``Stem Cell Research Act of 
     2001''.

     SEC. 2. HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL GENERATION AND RESEARCH.

       Part H of the Title IV of the Public Health Service Act (42 
     U.S.C. 289 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section 
     498B the following:

     ``SEC. 498C. HUMAN EMBRYONIC STEM CELL GENERATION AND 
                   RESEARCH.

       ``(a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, the Secretary may only conduct, support, or fund 
     research on human embryos for the purpose of generating 
     embryonic stem cells and utilizing stem cells that have been 
     derived from embryos in accordance with this section.
       ``(b) Sources of Embryonic Stem Cells.--For purposes of 
     carrying out research under subsection (a), the human 
     embryonic stem cells involved shall be derived only from 
     embryos that have been donated from in-vitro fertilization 
     clinics after compliance with the following:
       ``(1) Prior to the consideration of embryo donation and 
     through consultation with the progenitors, it is determined 
     that the embryos will never be implanted in a woman and would 
     otherwise be discarded.
       ``(2) The embryos are donated with the written informed 
     consent of the progenitors.
       ``(c) Restrictions.--
       ``(1) In general.--The following restriction shall apply 
     with respect to human embryonic stem cell research conducted 
     or supported under subsection (a):
       ``(A) The research involved shall not result in the 
     creation of human embryos.
       ``(B) The research involved shall not result in the 
     reproductive cloning of a human being.
       ``(2) Prohibition.--
       ``(A) In general.--It shall be unlawful for any person 
     receiving Federal funds to knowingly acquire, receive, or 
     otherwise transfer any human embryos for valuable 
     consideration if the acquisition, receipt, or transfer 
     affects interstate commerce.
       ``(B) Definition.--In subparagraph (A), the term `valuable 
     consideration' does not include reasonable payments 
     associated with transportation, transplantation, processing, 
     preservation, quality control, or storage.
       ``(d) Guidelines.--The Secretary, in conjunction with the 
     Director of the National Institutes of Health, shall issue 
     guidelines that expand on the rules governing human embryonic 
     stem cell research (as in effect on the date of enactment of 
     this section) to include rules that govern the derivation of 
     stem cells from donated embryos under this section.
       ``(e) Reporting Requirements.--The Secretary shall annually 
     prepare and submit to the appropriate committees of Congress 
     a report describing the activities carried out under this 
     section during the preceding fiscal year, and including a 
     description of whether and to what extent research under 
     subsection (a) has been conducted in accordance with this 
     section.''.

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my distinguished 
colleague, Senator Specter, on the introduction of the ``Stem Cell 
Research Act of 2001.'' I want to commend Senator Specter for having 
the leadership and foresight to introduce legislation which will 
broaden the ability of federally-funded scientists to pursue stem cell 
research, under certain, limited conditions.
  From enabling the development of cell and tissue transplantation, to 
improving and accelerating pharmaceutical research and development, to 
increasing our understanding of human development and cancer biology, 
the potential benefits of stem cell research are truly awe-inspiring.
  Stem cells hold hope for countless patients through potentially 
lifesaving therapies for Parkinson's, Alzheimers, stroke, heart disease 
and diabetes. Also exciting is the possibility that researchers may be 
able to alter stem cells genetically so they would avoid attack by the 
patient's immune system.
  Currently, for example, researchers are conducting groundbreaking 
research on the devastating condition commonly known as ``Lou Gehrig's 
disease.'' They are injecting stem cells into the spinal cords of 
moneys in an attempt to treat the disease. And they are reporting very 
promising early results.
  But the potential benefits of this study and others could be delayed 
or even denied to patients without a healthy partnership between the 
private sector and the federal government.
  While market interest in stem cell technology is strong, and private 
companies will continue to fund this research, the government has an 
important role to play in supporting the basic and applied science that 
underpins these technologies. The problem is that early, basic science 
is always going to be underfunded by the private sector because this 
type of research does not get products onto the market quickly enough. 
The only way to ensure that this research is conducted is to allow the 
NIH to support it.
  The Department of Health and Human Services ruled last year that 
under the current ban on human embryo research, federally-funded 
scientists can conduct stem cell research if they use cell lines 
derived from private sources. Unfortunately, the current administration 
has placed this ruling under review. We are anxiously awaiting the 
outcome of this review.
  In the meantime, I am pleased to join my colleagues in stating my 
strong support for stem cell research. There is broad agreement, across 
party lines, that this research is important, it could save lives, and 
it should not be halted.
  In its report, ``Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research,'' the 
National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) concludes that stem cell 
research should be allowed to go forward with federal support, as long 
as researchers were limited to only two sources of stem cells: fetal 
tissue and embryos resulting from infertility treatments. And they 
recommend that federal support to be contingent on an open system of 
oversight and review.
  NBAC also arrived at the important conclusion that it is ethically 
acceptable for the federal government to finance research that both 
derives cell lines from embryos and that uses those cell lines. Their 
report states, ``Relying on cell lines that might be derived 
exclusively by a subset of privately funded researchers who are 
interested in this area could severely limit scientific and clinical 
progress.''
  The Commission goes on to say that ``scientists who conduct basic 
research and are interested in fundamental cellular processes are 
likely to make elemental discoveries about the nature of ES [embryonic 
stem] cells as they derive them in the laboratory.''
  NBAC's report presents reasonable guidelines for federal policy. Our 
bill bans human embryo research, but allows federally-funded scientists 
to derive human pluripotent stem cells from human embryos if those 
embryos are obtained from IVF clinics, if the donor has provided 
informed consent and the embryo was no longer needed for fertility 
treatments. The American Society of Cell Biology estimates that

[[Page S3554]]

100,000 human embryos are currently frozen in IVF clinics, in excess of 
their clinical need.
  In addition, our language requires HHS and NIH to develop procedural 
guidelines to make sure that stem cell research is conducted in an 
ethical, sound manner. As it stands today, stem cell research in the 
private sector is not subject to federal monitoring or ethical 
requirements.
  Mr. President, stem cell research holds such hope, such potential for 
millions of Americans who are sick and in pain, it is morally wrong for 
us to prevent or delay our world-class scientists from building on the 
progress that has been made.
  As long as this research is conducted in an ethically validated 
manner, it should be allowed to go forward, and it should receive 
federal support. That is why Senator Specter and I have joined together 
on legislation that will allow our nation's top scientists to pursue 
critical cures and therapies for the diseases and chronic conditions 
which strike too many Americans. I urge my Senate colleagues to join us 
in supporting this bill.

                          ____________________