Congressional Record, Volume 147 Issue 49 (Thursday, April 5, 2001)

[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.

____________________