[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 85 (Tuesday, June 19, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6450-S6455]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. HUTCHINSON (for himself and Mr. Dayton):
S. 1058. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
tax relief for farmers and the producers of biodiesel, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. HUTCHINSON. Mr. President, the debate over energy use in America
has gripped our national attention for well over a year. A week doesn't
go by that you don't pick up a newspaper or magazine and read at least
one story about our Nation's domestic or foreign energy crisis. One
issue in the energy debate that has caught my attention and that of
farmers in my State is renewable fuels.
The technology to convert agricultural crops into combustible fuel,
suitable for use in modern diesel and gasoline engines, has existed for
more than 100 years. I believe this process continues to hold great
potential for America. The production and use of biofuels offers our
Nation a safe, renewable source of energy for travel and transport, not
to mention the long-term economic benefits for farmers and consumers.
That is why I rise today to introduce the Biodiesel Renewable Fuels
Act. I am pleased that Senator Dayton has joined with me as my lead
cosponsor. This bill encourages the use of biodiesel by establishing a
tax credit for manufacturers who produce a blend of conventional diesel
and soybean or oilseed additives. By reducing the diesel fuel excise
tax, suppliers will receive a 3-cent-per-gallon credit for using a
diesel blend that contains at least 2 percent biodiesel. This tax
credit is very similar to the existing tax incentive for ethanol, a
biofuel made from corn-based products. I believe a tax incentive for
soy-based biodiesel will increase domestic production and capture the
agricultural, environmental and economical benefits associated with
using this renewable source of energy.
Most Americans don't realize that farm communities sit atop a vast
and virtually untapped source of renewable fuels in the form of
agriculture crops. Farmers in Arkansas are interested in developing new
markets for soybean and oilseed products. In Arkansas for example,
farmers grew 94 million bushels, or 2.5 million metric tons, of
soybeans last year. Nationally, farmers produced 2.6 billion bushels of
soybeans in 1999-2000, equal to 72 million metric tons. The oil derived
from soybeans and other oilseed crops can be refined into a diesel
additive or diesel alternative. According to a USDA study released in
1996, an annual market for biodiesel of 100 million gallons in the
United States would raise the price of soybeans by up to seven cents
per bushel. Given the recent U.S. soybean crop, that kind of annual
market would result in more than $168 million directly related to the
use of soy-based biodiesel.
Producing biodiesel domestically also means that more money stays in
the U.S. Instead of purchasing more foreign petroleum, manufacturers
can reduce their dependence on overseas oil by adding biodiesel blends
for use in existing diesel engines. If domestic companies are
encouraged to develop the infrastructure necessary to produce more
biodiesel, the economic effect will be more U.S. jobs, lower prices for
the consumer and larger markets for farmers.
Developing markets for agricultural commodities and reducing our
dependence on foreign oil is good, but there are environmental benefits
as well. It is well documented that the burning of biofuels in
combustion engines reduces the emissions of harmful greenhouse gases
and particulate matter. In fact, biodiesel passes some of the
Environmental Protection Agency's most stringent emissions and health
standards for fuel additives and fuel alternatives. This becomes
important when you consider the EPA's recent announcement that
California should continue to use ethanol as a fuel oxygenate to
improve air quality. As more cities and States are faced with having to
improve the quality of their air, I believe biofuels are a sensible
alternative to existing oxygenates which are not as friendly to the
environment or human health.
If using biodiesel improves air quality, reduces our dependence on
foreign oil and provides a value-added market for soybean and oilseed
crops, then we should support legislation to further development of
this renewable source of fuel. My bill is good for farmers, it's good
for consumers and it's good for
[[Page S6451]]
the environment. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Biodiesel
Renewable Fuels Act be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1058
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; ETC.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Biodiesel
Renewable Fuels Act''.
(b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly
provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is
expressed in terms of an amendment to or a repeal of a
section or other provision, the reference shall be considered
to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986.
SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR BIODIESEL USED AS FUEL.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 (relating to business related credits) is amended
by inserting after section 40 the following new section:
``SEC. 40A. BIODIESEL USED AS FUEL.
``(a) General Rule.--For purposes of section 38, the
biodiesel fuels credit determined under this section for the
taxable year is an amount equal to the biodiesel mixture
credit.
``(b) Definition of Biodiesel Mixture Credit.--For purposes
of this section--
``(1) Biodiesel mixture credit.--
``(A) In general.--The biodiesel mixture credit of any
taxpayer for any taxable year is the sum of the products of
the biodiesel mixture rate for each blend of qualified
biodiesel mixture and the number of gallons of the blend of
the taxpayer for the taxable year.
``(B) Biodiesel mixture rate.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), the biodiesel mixture rate shall be--
``(i) the applicable amount for a B-1 blend,
``(ii) 3.0 cents for a B-2 blend, and
``(iii) 20.0 cents for a B-20 blend.
``(C) Blends.--For purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) B-1 blend.--The term `B-1 blend' means a qualified
biodiesel mixture if at least 0.5 percent but less than 2.0
percent of the mixture is biodiesel.
``(ii) B-2 blend.--The term `B-2 blend' means a qualified
biodiesel mixture if at least 2.0 percent but less than 20
percent of the mixture is biodiesel.
``(iii) B-20 blend.--The term `B-20 blend' means a
qualified biodiesel mixture if at least 20 percent of the
mixture is biodiesel.
``(D) Applicable amount.--For purposes of this paragraph,
the term `applicable amount' means, in the case of a B-1
blend, the amount equal to 1.5 cents multiplied by a fraction
the numerator of which is the percentage of biodiesel in the
B-1 blend and the denominator of which is 1 percent.
``(2) Qualified biodiesel mixture.--
``(A) In general.--The term `qualified biodiesel mixture'
means a mixture of diesel and biodiesel which--
``(i) is sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any
person for use as a fuel; or
``(ii) is used as a fuel by the taxpayer producing such
mixture.
``(B) Sale or use must be in trade or business, etc.--
Biodiesel used in the production of a qualified biodiesel
mixture shall be taken into account--
``(i) only if the sale or use described in subparagraph (A)
is in a trade or business of the taxpayer; and
``(ii) for the taxable year in which such sale or use
occurs.
``(C) Casual off-farm production not eligible.--No credit
shall be allowed under this section with respect to any
casual off-farm production of a qualified biodiesel mixture.
``(c) Coordination With Exemption From Excise Tax.--The
amount of the credit determined under this section with
respect to any biodiesel shall, under regulations prescribed
by the Secretary, be properly reduced to take into account
any benefit provided with respect to such biodiesel solely by
reason of the application of section 4041(n) or section
4081(f).
``(d) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) Biodiesel defined.--
``(A) In general.--The term `biodiesel' means the monoalkyl
esters of long chain fatty acids derived from vegetable oils
for use in compressional-ignition (diesel) engines. Such term
shall include esters derived from vegetable oils from corn,
soybeans, sunflower seeds, cottonseeds, canola, crambe,
rapeseeds, safflowers, flaxseeds, and mustard seeds.
``(B) Registration requirements.--Such term shall only
include a biodiesel which meets the registration requirements
for fuels and fuel additives established by the Environmental
Protection Agency under section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42
U.S.C. 7545).
``(2) Biodiesel mixture not used as a fuel, etc.--
``(A) Imposition of tax.--If--
``(i) any credit was determined under this section with
respect to biodiesel used in the production of any qualified
biodiesel mixture, and
``(ii) any person--
``(I) separates the biodiesel from the mixture, or
``(II) without separation, uses the mixture other than as a
fuel,
then there is hereby imposed on such person a tax equal to
the product of the biodiesel mixture rate applicable under
subsection (b)(1)(B) and the number of gallons of the
mixture.
``(B) Applicable laws.--All provisions of law, including
penalties, shall, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent
with this section, apply in respect of any tax imposed under
subparagraph (A) as if such tax were imposed by section 4081
and not by this chapter.
``(3) Pass-thru in the case of estates and trusts.--Under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the
rules of subsection (d) of section 52 shall apply.
``(e) Election To Have Biodiesel Fuels Credit Not Apply.--
``(1) In general.--A taxpayer may elect to have this
section not apply for any taxable year.
``(2) Time for making election.--An election under
paragraph (1) for any taxable year may be made (or revoked)
at any time before the expiration of the 3-year period
beginning on the last date prescribed by law for filing the
return for such taxable year (determined without regard to
extensions).
``(3) Manner of making election.--An election under
paragraph (1) (or revocation thereof) shall be made in such
manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe.''
(b) Credit Treated as Part of General Business Credit.--
Section 38(b) is amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of
paragraph (14), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (15) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the
end the following:
``(16) the biodiesel fuels credit determined under section
40A.''
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 39(d) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(11) No carryback of biodiesel fuels credit before
january 1, 2003.--No portion of the unused business credit
for any taxable year which is attributable to the biodiesel
fuels credit determined under section 40A may be carried back
to a taxable year beginning before January 1, 2003.''
(2) Section 196(c) is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (10), and by adding at the end the following:
``(11) the biodiesel fuels credit determined under section
40A.''
(3) The table of sections for subpart D of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by adding after the item
relating to section 40 the following new item:
``Sec. 40A. Biodiesel used as fuel.''
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2001.
SEC. 3. REDUCTION OF MOTOR FUEL EXCISE TAXES ON BIODIESEL
MIXTURES.
(a) In General.--Section 4081 (relating to manufacturers
tax on petroleum products) is amended by adding at the end
the following new subsection:
``(f) Biodiesel Mixtures.--Under regulations prescribed by
the Secretary--
``(1) In general.--In the case of the removal or entry of a
qualified biodiesel mixture, the rate of tax under subsection
(a) shall be the otherwise applicable rate reduced by the
biodiesel mixture rate (if any) applicable to the mixture.
``(2) Tax prior to mixing.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of the removal or entry of
diesel fuel for use in producing at the time of such removal
or entry a qualified biodiesel mixture, the rate of tax under
subsection (a) shall be the otherwise applicable rate,
reduced by the amount determined under subparagraph (B).
``(B) Applicable reduction.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A), the amount determined under this subparagraph is an
amount equal to the biodiesel mixture rate for the qualified
biodiesel mixture to be produced from the diesel fuel,
divided by a percentage equal to 100 percent minus the
percentage of biodiesel which will be in the mixture.
``(3) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection, any
term used in this subsection which is also used in section
40A shall have the meaning given such term by section 40A.
``(4) Certain rules to apply.--Rules similar to the rules
of paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection (c) shall apply for
purposes of this subsection.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 4041 is amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
``(n) Biodiesel Mixtures.--Under regulations prescribed by
the Secretary, in the case of the sale or use of a qualified
biodiesel mixture (as defined in section 40A(b)(2)), the
rates under paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) shall be
the otherwise applicable rates, reduced by any applicable
biodiesel mixture rate (as defined in section
40A(b)(1)(B)).''.
(2) Section 6427 is amended by redesignating subsection (p)
as subsection (q) and by inserting after subsection (o) the
following new subsection:
``(p) Biodiesel Mixtures.--Except as provided in subsection
(k), if any diesel fuel on which tax was imposed by section
4081 at a rate not determined under section 4081(f) is used
by any person in producing a qualified biodiesel mixture (as
defined in section 40A(b)(2)) which is sold or used in such
person's trade or business, the Secretary shall pay (without
interest) to such person an amount equal to the per gallon
applicable biodiesel mixture rate (as defined in section
40A(b)(1)(B)) with respect to such fuel.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on January 1, 2002.
[[Page S6452]]
SEC. 4. HIGHWAY TRUST FUND HELD HARMLESS.
There are hereby transferred (from time to time) from the
funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation amounts equivalent
to the reductions that would occur (but for this section) in
the receipts of the Highway Trust Fund by reason of the
amendments made by this Act. Such transfers shall be made on
the basis of estimates made by the Secretary of the Treasury
and adjustments shall be made to subsequent transfers to
reflect any errors in the estimates.
Mr. DAYTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce, along with my
distinguished colleague Senator Hutchinson from Arkansas, legislation
that will increase the use of biodiesel fuel throughout our country.
Biodiesel is a natural additive to diesel fuel, much as ethanol is to
regular gasoline. It is also a fuel in its own right. Biodiesel is made
from soybeans and other vegetable oils. Its use as a 2-percent blend
with diesel fuel, and in some instances as high as a 20-percent blend,
will increase the demand for these commodities, boost their market
price, and reduce the toxic carbon emissions from trucks and other
vehicles across this Nation, all at no additional cost to American
taxpayers.
Our legislation would provide a 3-cent-per-gallon credit to diesel
fuel suppliers using 2-percent biodiesel and up to a 20-cent-per-gallon
credit for blends containing 20-percent biodiesel.
As soybean prices rise then due to the increased usage, Federal
spending on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Marketing Assistance
Loan Program will be reduced accordingly, resulting in substantial
savings for the American taxpayers.
A credit such as this would otherwise reduce the revenues that would
be going into the highway trust fund. Given the deterioration of many
of our Nation's highways, that would be unwise. Thus, this legislation
provides for the Commodity Credit Corporation to reimburse the highway
trust fund for its forgone revenues.
Our current energy crisis is also an opportunity for our country. I
currently have a van driving around the State of Minnesota that uses
85-percent ethanol fuel with no difficulties whatsoever. These
agricultural fuels are not just possible tomorrow, they are practical
today. We just need to help them become financially competitive, until
these industries can reach the volume of production necessary to
compete with the giant oil industry.
In conclusion, this legislation is an important step in several right
directions--toward less foreign oil dependency, toward higher
agricultural commodity prices for American farmers, toward lower
taxpayer costs for our struggling farm economy, and toward a cleaner
air quality for us all. I respectfully urge my colleagues to support
this important legislation.
______
By Mr. BAYH:
S. 1059. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
that certain postsecondary educational benefits provided by an employer
to children of employees shall be excludable from gross income as a
scholarship; to the Committee on Finance.
______
By Mr. BAYH:
S. 1060. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
that certain postsecondary educational benefits provided by an employer
to children of employees shall be excludable from gross income as part
of an educational assistance program; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BAYH. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce legislation today
that will help thousands of American workers with the financial burden
associated with sending a daughter or son to college. In this climate
of labor shortages, U.S. companies are looking for innovative ways to
maintain and attract a dedicated and qualified workforce. Some
companies have creatively turned to providing college scholarships for
their employees' children. My legislation would allow employees to
deduct these scholarships from their gross income. Under current law,
an employee generally is not taxed on post-secondary education
assistance provided by an employer for the benefit of the employee. My
bill would extend this treatment to employer-provided education
assistance for the employees' children, up to $2,000 per child.
As many of my colleagues know, employer-provided education assistance
is considered an integral tool in keeping America's workforce well
trained and equipped to deal with the changing face of the New Economy.
Current law not only allows companies to keep an up-to-date labor pool,
but also allows many workers to move from low-wage, entry level
positions up the economic ladder of success. Extending tax-free
treatment to the children of employees not only will help working
families, but will contribute to our Nation's competitiveness in an
increasingly dynamic global economy.
My legislation is very simple. It allows employees whose companies
provide educational scholarships for employees' children to exclude up
to $2000 from gross income per child. An employee may not exclude more
than $5,250 from gross income for employer education assistance. This
is the limit established under Section 127(a)(2) of the Internal
Revenue Code for employer education assistance. In essence, there would
be ``family cap.'' Workers could deduct a $2,000 scholarship for their
child and could also exclude up to $3,250 of educational benefits for
themselves, however, the combined amounts could not exceed $5,250.
In today's economy, American companies are no longer looking purely
for a high-school diploma, but require that their workers have some
sort of post-secondary education or training. Many working families
struggle in providing this basic start which will help their children
get well-paying jobs.
This piece of legislation is also a modest proposal. The Joint
Committee on Taxation has scored this provision at $231 million over 10
years. I look forward to working to make sure that this provision is
fully offset in a responsible manner. I hope my colleagues will join me
to help ease the burden of American families with the soaring costs of
higher education.
______
By Mr. McCONNELL:
S. 1061. A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire
Fern Lake and the surrounding watershed in the States of Kentucky and
Tennessee for addition to Cumberland Gap National Historic Park, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, last month the Bush Administration
unveiled a new national energy strategy that strikes an important
balance between the twin priorities of production and conservation.
Today I am proud to introduce legislation with Congressman Hal Rogers
that takes a step toward fulfilling the conservation side of that
energy equation in my home state of Kentucky.
Our bill, the Fern Lake Conservation and Recreation Act of 2001, will
authorize the Cumberland Gap National Historical Park to purchase Fern
Lake, a natural landmark on the Kentucky-Tennessee border that has
served as the municipal water supply for Middlesboro, KY since the lake
was constructed in 1893. This bill will protect the lake as a clean and
safe source of rural water for Kentuckians, enhance the scenic and
recreational value of Cumberland Gap National Historical Park, and
increase tourism opportunities in the three states that border the
Park--Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia.
For those who may be less familiar with this part of the country,
Fern Lake is a beautiful and pristine body of water set against the
backdrop of the Appalachian Mountains. The 150-acre lake presently sits
adjacent to the Park and is part of the viewshed from Pinnacle
Overlook, which is one of the Park's most popular attractions. It is
said that the glassy surface of Fern Lake is so clear that you can see
fish swimming 10 feet below the surface. Perhaps that is one of the
reasons why Middlesboro Mayor Ben Hickman describes his town's water
supply as one of the best in the United States.
With a lake of such natural beauty and exceptional water quality, it
is no wonder that the citizens and community leaders want to protect
it. Although Fern Lake has been privately owned for most of its
existence, it has been for sale since July 2000, and there is concern
in Middlesboro that a new owner may not share the same interests
regarding the lake as those embraced by the community. That is why a
growing chorus of community leaders and citizens have called for the
Cumberland Gap National Historical Park to purchase Fern Lake. This
solution would guarantee management of this
[[Page S6453]]
wonderful resource consistent with the needs of the community.
This legislation is needed because currently the Park is prohibited
by law from expanding its boundaries by purchasing new land with
appropriated funds. Our bill, therefore, authorizes the Park to use
appropriated funds, if necessary, to purchase Fern Lake (and up to
4,500 acres of the surrounding watershed) and to manage the lake for
public recreational uses. This bill also requires the Park to maintain
Fern Lake as a source of clean drinking water, authorizes the Park to
sell water to the city of Middlesboro, and permits the proceeds of the
water sales to be spent by the Secretary of the Interior without
further appropriation. And because the scenic and recreational values
of Fern Lake will benefit the tourism industry in all three adjacent
states--Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia--the legislation directs the
Secretary of the Interior to consult with appropriate officials in
these states to determine the best way to manage the municipal water
supply and to promote the increased tourism opportunities associated
with Park ownership of Fern Lake.
This bill is a small but important example of the type of targeted
conservation measures that are essential to making a national energy
policy work for all Americans. This is not the conservation of
environmental extremism that seeks to divide communities, vilify
opponents, or present unworkable approaches in the name of political
opportunism. Rather, this is conservation that builds upon community
consensus. It is common sense conservation that seeks environmental
solutions that will enhance rather than disturb local industries such
as tourism, which have been so vital to economically depressed areas
such as southeastern Kentucky. And finally, this is conservation that
is careful to consider, and where necessary, to protect, the property
rights of affected landowners. This bill requires that the Park acquire
land from willing sellers only, and the National Park Service has
assured us that it has no authority to place land-use restrictions on
private land until the land is actually acquired by the Park.
Targeted and consensus-driven conservation measures such as this one
are not always easy to craft, but they are always worth the effort.
This bill is proof that environmental protection and economic
development need not be at odds, and that there are a number of
responsible and practical conservation opportunities that can bring
communities together rather than tear them apart. Indeed, if this
simple formula for finding consensus conservation opportunities--broad
community support, local employment, and private property protections--
was replicated in all 50 States, we could make actual and noticeable
strides as a nation toward protecting and promoting our natural
treasures.
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. 1061
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 ``Fern Lake Conservation and
Recreation Act of 2001''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) Fern Lake and its surrounding watershed in Bell County,
Kentucky, and Claiborne County, Tennessee, is within the
potential boundaries of Cumberland Gap National Historical
Park as originally authorized by the Act of June 11, 1940 (54
Stat 262; 16 U.S.C. 261 et seq.).
(2) The acquisition of Fern Lake and its surrounding
watershed and its inclusion in Cumberland Gap National
Historical Park would protect the vista from Pinnacle
Overlook, which is one of the park's most valuable scenic
resources and most popular attractions, and enhance
recreational opportunities at the park.
(3) Fern Lake is the water supply source for the City of
Middlesboro, Kentucky, and environs.
(4) The 4500-acre Fern Lake watershed is privately owned,
and the 150-acre lake and part of the watershed are currently
for sale, but the Secretary of the Interior is precluded by
the first section of the Act of June 11, 1940 (16 U.S.C.
261), from using appropriated funds to acquire the lands.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of the Act are--
(1) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to use
appropriated funds if necessary, in addition to other
acquisition methods, to acquire from willing sellers Fern
Lake and its surrounding watershed in order to protect scenic
and natural resources and enhance recreational opportunities
at Cumberland Gap National Historical Park; and
(2) to allow the continued supply of safe, clean, drinking
water from Fern Lake to the City of Middlesboro, Kentucky,
and environs.
SEC. 3. LAND ACQUISITION, FERN LAKE, CUMBERLAND GAP NATIONAL
HISTORICAL PARK.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Fern lake.--The term ``Fern Lake'' means Fern Lake
located in Bell County, Kentucky, and Claiborne County,
Tennessee.
(2) Land.--The term ``land'' means land, water, interests
in land, and any improvements on the land.
(3) Park.--The term ``park'' means Cumberland Gap National
Historical Park, as authorized and established by the Act of
June 11, 1940 (54 Stat 262; 16 U.S.C. 261 et seq.).
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior, acting through the Director of the National
Park Service.
(b) Acquisition Authorized.--The Secretary may acquire for
addition to the park lands consisting of approximately 4,500
acres and containing Fern Lake and its surrounding watershed,
as generally depicted on the map entitled ``Fern Lake
Watershed Boundary Addition, Cumberland Gap National
Historical Park'', numbered 380/80,004, and dated May 2001.
The map shall be on file in the appropriate offices of the
National Park Service.
(c) Authorized Acquisition Methods.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding the Act of June 11, 1940
(16 U.S.C. 261 et seq.), the Secretary may acquire lands
described in subsection (b) by donation, purchase with
donated or appropriated funds, or exchange. However, the
lands may be acquired only with the consent of the owner.
(2) Easements.--At the discretion of the Secretary, the
Secretary may acquire land described in subsection (b) that
is subject to an easement for the continued operation of
providing the water supply for the City of Middlesboro,
Kentucky, and environs.
(d) Boundary Adjustment and Administration.--Upon the
acquisition of land under this section, the Secretary shall
revise the boundaries of the park to include the land in the
park. Subject to subsection (e), the Secretary shall
administer the acquired lands as part of the park in
accordance with the laws and regulations applicable to the
park.
(e) Special Issues Related to Fern Lake.--
(1) Protection of water quality.--The Secretary shall
manage public recreational use of Fern Lake, if acquired by
the Secretary, in a manner that is consistent with the
protection of the lake as a source of safe, clean, drinking
water.
(2) Sale of water.--In the event the Secretary's
acquisition of land includes the water supply of Fern Lake,
the Secretary may enter into contracts to facilitate the sale
and distribution of water from the lake for the municipal
water supply for the City of Middlesboro, Kentucky, and
environs. The Secretary shall ensure that the terms and
conditions of any such contract is consistent with National
Park Service policies for the protection of park resources.
Proceeds from the sale of the water shall be available for
expenditure by the Secretary at the park without further
appropriation.
(3) Consultation requirements.--In order to better manage
Fern Lake and its surrounding watershed, if acquired by the
Secretary, in a manner that will facilitate the provision of
water for municipal needs as well as the establishment and
promotion of new recreational opportunities made possible by
the addition of Fern Lake to the park, the Secretary shall
consult with--
(A) appropriate officials in the States of Kentucky,
Tennessee, and Virginia and political subdivisions of these
States;
(B) organizations involved in promoting tourism in these
States; and
(C) other interested parties.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Ms. Collins, Mr. Biden, Mrs. Clinton,
Mr. Feingold, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Inouye):
S. 1062. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to promote
organ donation and facilitate interstate linkage and 24-hour access to
State donor registries, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, this year the waiting list for organ
transplants among Americans stands at more than 75,000. I rise to urge
all Senators, and all Americans to become organ donors. I rise to
introduce legislation to make it easier for individuals to donate and
make it simpler to identify the decedents's donation wishes. I am
pleased that Senators Collins, Biden, Clinton, Feingold, Feinstein,
Johnson, and Inouye join me in this effort.
Access to organ transplantation remains limited by the shortage of
donated organs. Each day, an average of
[[Page S6454]]
17 people on the waiting list will die. And the waiting list is
growing. In fact, since 1990 the number of men, women and children
awaiting life-saving transplants has grown by at least 10 percent easy
year. We need to move expeditiously to reduce these deaths due to the
scarcity of willing organ donors. Every 14 minutes we do not act,
another name is added to the national transplant waiting list.
Over the last several years, I have worked with many of my colleagues
on a variety of initiatives to increase organ donation. In 1996, I
authored legislation to include an organ donation card with every
Federal income tax refund mailed. More than 70 million donor cards were
mailed, the largest distribution in history. In 1997, I authored a
provision in the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education
Appropriation bill that authorized a study of hospital best practices
for increasing organ donation. More recently, I launched a campaign
known as ``Give Thanks, Give Life'' with the National Football League
and a large coalition of advocacy organizations to promote family
discussions over Thanksgiving of family members' desire to become organ
donors.
But we need to do more. Major barriers to donation still exist. A
recent analysis by the Lewin Group, Inc., found low rates of family
consent to donation. In addition, there are many missed opportunities
in the process of identifying and referring all potential donors to
procurement organizations so that families may be approached. A 1996
study of potential organ donors in hospitals found that in nearly a
third of all cases, potential donors were not identified or no request
was made to the family.
Today I am introducing a comprehensive proposal to address these
obstacles, including a number of new initiatives. The DONATE Act: 1.
Establishes a national organ and tissue donor registry resource center
at the Department of Health and Human Services; 2. Authorizes grants to
States to support the development, enhancement, expansion and
evaluation of statewide organ and tissue donor registries; 3. Funds
additional research to learn more about effective strategies that
increase donation rates; 4. Provides financial assistance to donors for
travel and subsistence expenses incurred toward making living donations
of their organs; 5. Expands Federal efforts to educate the public about
organ donation and improve outreach activities; 6. Provides grants to
hospitals and organ procurement organizations to fund organ
coordinators; and 7. Directs the Secretary of the Treasury to strike a
bronze medal to commemorate organ donors and their families.
Organ and tissue donor registries have the potential to greatly
improve donation rates. Registries provide medical and/or procurement
personnel easy access to the donation wishes of brain-dead patients. By
indicating the potential donors wishes to the family, a registry
documentation can aid in securing next of kin consent. Despite the fact
that 85 percent of Americans support organ donation for transplants,
studies indicate that only about 50 percent of families consent to
donation. Well-designed databases can improve coordination between
hospitals, physicians, organ procurement organizations and families.
Registries can also assist in evaluating education and outreach efforts
by providing information about registrant demographics and audience-
specific effectiveness of awareness campaigns. Yet currently only about
a dozen States operate mature, centralized organ and tissue donor
registries.
I am proud that the State of Illinois was one of the first and is
currently the largest such system. In Illinois, individuals can
indicate their willingness to donate by signing their drivers license.
Drivers' license applicants are also asked if they wish to have their
name listed on the confidential statewide registry. In addition to
signing up at a driver services facility, persons can join the registry
by calling an eight hundred number or electronically via the web. More
than 3 million Illinoisans have already joined and 100,000 more sign up
each month. Today, participation in the Illinois Donor Registry is 39
percent statewide, an increase of 77 percent since 1993. In addition,
about one fifth of all facilities are reporting participation rates at
or above 50 percent. Most importantly, organ donation has risen 40
percent since 1993 and the Regional Organ Bank of Illinois has led the
nation in the number of organs recovered for transplantation since
1994.
But unfortunately Illinois is the exception and not the rule. Most
States do not have programs and gaps in knowledge exist. In fact, no
one kept track of which States operate organ donor registries until
recently. We have little information about what works best when
developing registries. Guidance for States about the basic components
of effective systems such as the core functions and content, legal and
ethical standards, privacy protections and data exchange protocols, is
scarce.
And in addition to the fact that most States do not operate
registries, among those who do, currently no mechanism exists to share
information between these registries. So if a Illinoisan dies in
Wisconsin, law enforcement or hospital officials in Wisconsin have no
easy way of knowing of the victims intent to donate. To be effective,
registries need to be accessible to the proper authorities around the
clock without regard for State boundaries. To be effective, registries
also need to function as an advance directive, ensuring that the donors
wishes are honored.
The DONATE Act both funds State registry development and creates the
technical expertise States need to do so. The bill establishes a
National Organ and Tissue Donation Resource Center, informed by a task
force of national experts, to develop registry guidelines for States
based on best practices. The Center would maintain a donor registry
clearinghouse, including a web site, to collect, synthesize, and
distribute information about what works. The proposal also requires
that a mechanism be established to link State registries and to provide
around-the-clock access to information. To help ensure that registry
development is based on evidence of effectiveness and best practices,
and to help us understand better how to utilize the registry tool to
increase donations, the DONATE Act asks an advisory task force to
examine state registries and make recommendations to Congress about the
states of such systems and ways to develop linkages between state
registries.
Public education is equally as important as developing better
technical tools and programs to increase donation if we are to do a
better job of matching the number of donors to people in need of a
transplant. The DONATE Act launches a national effort to raise public
awareness about the importance of organ donation and funds research to
find better ways to improve donation rates. The bill authorizes State
grants for innovative organ donor awareness and outreach initiatives
and programs aimed at increasing donation.
A number of additional innovative initiatives are included in this
bill. The DONATE Act would directly assist living donors, providing
financial assistance to offset travel, subsistence and other expenses
incurred toward making living donations of their organs. Similar
provisions recently cleared the House of Representatives by more than
400 votes. The DONATE Act includes the House passed bill, with a number
of improvements. For example, the Act does not restrict such assistance
to artificial residency requirements and it does not limit assistance
only to those who donate organs to low income recipients.
The DONATE Act also provides grants to hospitals and organ
procurement organizations to fund staff positions for organ
coordinators. These in-house organ coordinators would be responsible
for coordinating organ donation and recovery at a hospital or a group
of hospitals. Research has shown that these types of initiatives can
have dramatic results. A four-year retrospective study of a large
public hospital in Houston that implemented a coordinator program
resulted in a 64 percent increase in the consent rate along with a 94
percent increase in the number of organ donors.
Finally, the DONATE Act incorporates a valuable initiative developed
by Senator Bill Frist to present donors or the family of a donor with a
Congressional medal recognizing their gift of life. The bronze medal is
just
[[Page S6455]]
one small, meaningful way we can acknowledge the important act of
donating to save another person's life.
A great deal of input from experts, and from my colleagues as well,
contributed to this legislation. All of these important provisions come
with the strong support and input of many groups whose mission it is to
help save lives by increasing organ donation, including the American
Liver Foundation, the American Society of Transplantation and the
American Society of Transplant Surgeons. I strongly believe that this
type of concrete investment and commitment from the Federal government
is overdue and will make a real difference. And in this case a real
difference is someone's life.
I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort to wipe out the
waiting list for transplants. I urge you all to cosponsor the DONATE
Act and move expeditiously to pass this legislation.
______
By Mr. BOND (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Smith of New Hampshire,
Mr. Kerry, Mr. Warner, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Cleland, Mr.
Ensign, and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 1064. A bill to amend the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 to provide certain relief from
liability for small businesses; to the Committee on Environment and
Public Works.
Mr. BOND. Mr. President, it is a pleasure for me to introduce the
Small Business Liability Protection Act of 2001. This bill will provide
a lifeline for the thousands of small business owners threatened by
lawsuits and litigation under the broken Superfund liability system.
Joining me in introducing this legislation are Senators Reid, Smith,
Kerry, Warner, Chafee, Cleland, Landrieu, Ensign, and Wyden.
The bill is simple. All this bill does is protect those who
contributed very small amounts of waste, or waste no different than
common household garbage, to a Superfund site. The bill will also speed
up the process for handling those little fish with a limited ability to
pay towards a Superfund site's cleanup.
The exact same version of this bill passed the House unanimously in
May and I am proud to have similar bipartisan support for this Senate
version. We have members from both the Environment Committee and the
Small Business Committee supporting this bill at introduction and I
encourage all my colleagues to join our effort.
My bill will not let polluters off the hook. This common-sense
proposal will make the Superfund program a little more reasonable and
workable. With this legislation, we can begin to provide some relief to
small business owners who are held hostage by potential Superfund
liability.
For years now, members from both sides of the aisle have said that
the Superfund program is broken, it doesn't work, it must be reformed.
Unfortunately we haven't gotten past the rhetoric to fix the problem.
Instead of making changes that will produce results that are better for
the taxpayers, better for the environment, and more efficient for
everyone involved--government agencies, Federal bureaucrats, and
Congress have protected this troubled and inefficient program from
meaning reform.
As Washington has played politics with the Superfund program,
innocent Main Street small business owners across the nation, the
engine of our economy, continue to be unfairly pulled into Superfund's
legal quagmire. We now have the opportunity to put all of that behind
us and move forward with bipartisan, common-sense reform.
Let's put a human face on this: recently, just across the Missouri
border--in Quincy, Illinois--160 small business owners were asked to
pay the EPA more than $3 million for garbage legally hauled to a dump
more than 20 years ago. The situation in Quincy is just one example of
the very real, ongoing Superfund legal threat to small business owners
across the nation.
We all know that Superfund was created to clean up the Nation's most-
hazardous waste sites. Superfund was not created to have small business
owners sued for simply throwing out their trash! These small business
owners are faced with so many challenges already, that the thousands of
dollars in penalties and lawsuits leave them with no choice but to
mortgage their businesses, their employees and their future to pay for
the bills of a broken government program.
How many times will we tell ourselves that this unacceptable
situation must be fixed before we act? Small business owners literally
cannot afford to wait around while we delay action on the common-sense
fixes required to protect them and our environment.
Is this legislation everything I would like to see. No. But this bill
does move us in the direction we need to go to ensure cleanup,
fairness, and progress in reforming the Superfund program.
In recognition of our small businesses around the country, I
introduce this bill and look forward to ensuring speedy adoption of
this long overdue legislation.
____________________