[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 127 (Wednesday, September 26, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9876-S9882]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mr. Craig):
  S. 1466. A bill to amend the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development 
Act to provide grants for special environmental assistance for the 
regulation of communities and habitat (``SEARCH grants'') to small 
communities; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
authorize a national environmental grants program called Project 
SEARCH. Project SEARCH is a simplified, flexible program that targets 
small communities most in need of assistance in meeting environmental 
goals.
  I am particularly excited about the proposal. I have heard from 
partners interested in helping with the legislation and from colleagues 
who recognize the unique challenges small communities face achieving 
environmental goals. 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 demonstrates that other sources of funding are 
unavailable or insufficient.
  Some of the major highlights of the program are: a simplified 
application process--no special grants coordinators required; 
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 increasingly 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 
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.
  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.
  The response and feedback from all participants has been 
overwhelmingly positive. Officials from the state and federal 
government 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 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 colleagues 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. WELLSTONE (for himself, Mr. Helms, Mr. Kohl, Mr. Akaka, 
        Mr. Feingold, Mr. Inouye, and Mr. Reed):
  S. 1467. A bill to amend the Hmong Veterans' Naturalization Act of 
2000 to extend the deadlines for application and payment of fees; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Bruce Vento 
Hmong Veterans' Naturalization Extension Act. The Act is named after my 
late colleague and dear friend, Congressman Bruce Vento. Congressman 
Vento dedicated much of his career to working with the Hmong community

[[Page S9877]]

in Minnesota. He worked for a decade to ensure the passage of the Hmong 
Veterans Naturalization Act. This bill would make it possible for all 
eligible Hmong veterans and their wives to receive the benefits they 
are due under this Act by extending the application deadline from 
November 26, 2001 to May 26, 2003.
  With less than 3 months remaining before the deadline passes for most 
of those covered under the Act, only 25 percent of all eligible 
applicants have filed for citizenship. Advocates for the Hmong believe 
it will be impossible for all those eligible to file by the deadline. 
The Hmong community has faced many challenges in getting veterans and 
their wives filed. The Department of Justice did not release its 
guidelines for 2\1/2\ months and many INS regional offices were 
unfamiliar with the guidelines for a period of time after that, 
resulting in eligible Hmong applicants being turned away. The language 
barrier that created the need for the Hmong Veteran Naturalization Act 
in the first place has meant that many Hmong needed assistance from 
Hmong community advocates to understand the citizenship process and to 
fill out the citizenship application. These advocacy organizations are 
vastly under-resourced and are overwhelmed by the demand for help from 
Hmong applicants.
  I want to make it clear. This bill would not increase the number of 
eligible applicants. It in no way would change the other requirements 
of the law. It simply would provide a necessary extension for existing 
eligible applicants.
  As the Senator from Minnesota, I am proud to represent one of the 
largest Hmong populations in America. My experience as a Senator has 
become much richer as a result of coming to know the history and 
culture of the Hmong people in Minnesota. I deeply respect their 
extraordinary efforts in support of the American people. I urge my 
colleagues' strong support of this legislation. The original Act was 
passed because of Hmong veterans' tremendous sacrifice on behalf of the 
United States during the Vietnam War and because of the unique literacy 
challenges the Hmong community faces. It would be wrong to deny the 
benefits of the Act to eligible veterans for reasons that are beyond 
their control. Let us fulfill the intent of the Act we passed last year 
and ensure that these veterans and their families receive the benefits 
they are due.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KYL:
  S. 1468. A bill for the relief of Ilko Vasilev Ivanov, Anelia 
Marinova Peneva, Marina Ilkova Ivanova, and Julia Ilkova Ivanova; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. KYL. 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. 1468

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

     SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

       In the administration of the Immigration and Nationality 
     Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Ilko Vasilev Ivanov, Anelia 
     Marinova Peneva, Marina Ilkova Ivanova, and Julia Ilkova 
     Ivanova shall be held and considered to have been lawfully 
     admitted to the United States for permanent residence as of 
     the date of the enactment of this Act upon payment of the 
     required visa fees.

     SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

       Upon the granting of permanent residence to Ilko Vasilev 
     Ivanov, Anelia Marinova Peneva, Marina Ilkova Ivanova, and 
     Julia Ilkova Ivanova as provided in this Act, the Secretary 
     of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by the 
     appropriate number during the current fiscal year the total 
     number of immigrant visas available to natives of the country 
     of the aliens' birth under subsection (a) of section 203 of 
     the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. REED (for himself, Mr. Torricelli, Mrs. Carnahan, Mr. 
        Durbin, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Wellstone, and Mrs. Clinton):
  S. 1469. A bill to amend the Head Start and Early Head Start programs 
to ensure that children eligible to participate in those programs are 
identified and treated for lead poisoning, and for other purposes; to 
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. REED. Mr. President, I rise today along with my colleague, 
Senator Torricelli of New Jersey, to introduce two pieces of 
legislation we believe are absolutely critical to our ongoing effort to 
combat childhood lead poisoning. These two bills, the Early Childhood 
Lead Poisoning Prevention Act and the Children's Lead SAFE Act, are 
intended to improve our ability to detect and treat children at high 
risk of lead poisoning, as well as expand our network of Federal 
program sites where children at increased risk of lead poisoning can be 
screened.
  The Early Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Act requires WIC and 
Head Start/Early Head Start programs with children under age 3 to 
assess whether a child participant has been screened for lead, and 
provide and track referrals for any child who has not been 
appropriately screened. The bill also calls upon WIC and Head Start/
Early Head Start grantees to ensure that all enrolled children are 
screened for lead poisoning and grants these entities the authority to 
perform or arrange blood lead screening for program participants. 
Lastly, the bill allows WIC clinics and Head Start/Early Head Start 
grantees to seek reimbursement through Medicaid or the State Children's 
Heath Insurance Program, CHIP, for eligible children who have received 
a lead screening test in accordance with CDC recommendations or 
Medicaid policy.
  The Children's Lead Screening Accountability for Early Intervention 
Act, or the Children's Lead SAFE Act, would require Medicaid 
contractors to comply with existing requirements to provide screening, 
treatment and any necessary follow-up services for Medicaid-eligible 
children who test positive for lead poisoning. To be clear, this is not 
imposing any new mandate on State Medicaid contractors. It is simply 
trying to make current law more effective by explicitly requiring 
health care providers to comply with Federal lead screening 
requirements that have been in existence since 1992.
  This new, stronger mandate has become necessary because 82 percent of 
children ages one through five have never been screened for lead 
poisoning, even though they were receiving health care benefits or 
services through Medicaid, WIC, or the Health Centers program, 
according to a recent report from the General Accounting Office, GAO, 
despite long standing Federal requirements. This means that of the 
estimated 890,000 children in the U.S. with elevated blood lead levels, 
over 400,000 have never been identified or treated. Even more 
disconcerting is that 50 percent of our States do not have screening 
policies that are consistent with Federal requirements.
  The reason why our two bills specifically focus on specific Federal 
programs stems from the GAO report, which indicated that 77 percent of 
U.S. children with high levels of lead in their blood are enrolled in 
Federal programs, highlighting the viral role of these programs in 
helping to eliminate the preventable tragedy of childhood lead 
poisoning. Better involvement by Federal programs in promoting 
screening and treatment is also critical to reducing the significant 
health care and special education costs associated with the 
irreversible effects of lead poisoning, which include the impairment of 
mental and physical development.
  We need to find the will and the resources to eradicate lead hazards 
for millions of at-risk children. We also need to make more Americans 
aware of the dangers of lead poisoning. I am committed to addressing 
this crisis, and I hope my colleagues will join us in supporting these 
bills and other lead poisoning prevention efforts.
  I ask consent that the text of the Early Childhood Lead Poisoning 
Prevention Act be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1469

       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 ``Early Childhood Lead 
     Poisoning Prevention Act of 2001''.

     SEC. 2. LEAD POISONING SCREENING FOR THE HEAD START AND EARLY 
                   HEAD START PROGRAMS.

       Section 645A of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C 9840a) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the first sentence of subsection (d), by inserting 
     before the period the following: ``and shall comply with 
     subsection (h)''; and

[[Page S9878]]

       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(h) Lead Poisoning Screening.--
       ``(1) In general.--An entity shall--
       ``(A) determine whether a child eligible to participate in 
     the program described in subsection (a)(1) has received a 
     blood lead screening test using a test that is appropriate 
     for age and risk factors upon the enrollment of the child in 
     the program; and
       ``(B) in the case of a child who has not received a blood 
     lead screening test, ensure that each enrolled child receives 
     such a test either by referral or by performing the test 
     (under contract or otherwise).
       ``(2) Screenings by entities.--
       ``(A) In general.--An entity may (under contract or 
     otherwise) perform a blood lead screening test that is 
     appropriate for age and risk factors on a child who seeks to 
     participate in the program.
       ``(B) Reimbursement.--
       ``(i) Children enrolled in or eligible for medicaid.--On 
     the request of an entity that performs or arranges for the 
     provision of a blood lead screening test under subparagraph 
     (A) of a child that is eligible for or receiving medical 
     assistance under a State plan under title XIX of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.), the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of, or limitation under, title XIX of the Social 
     Security Act, shall reimburse the entity, from funds that are 
     made available under that title, for the Federal medical 
     assistance percentage (as defined in section 1905(b) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(b)) of the cost of the 
     test and data reporting. Such costs shall include, if 
     determined to be desirable by the State agency, the costs of 
     providing screening through clinical laboratories certified 
     under section 353 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     263a), or purchasing, for use at sites providing services 
     under this section, blood lead testing instruments and 
     associated supplies approved for sale by the Food and Drug 
     Administration and used in compliance with such section 353.
       ``(ii) Children enrolled in or eligible for schip.--In the 
     case of a blood lead screening test performed under 
     subparagraph (A) (by the entity or under contract with the 
     entity) on a child who is eligible for or receiving medical 
     assistance under a State plan under title XXI of the Social 
     Security Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     notwithstanding any other provision of, or limitation under, 
     such title XXI, shall reimburse the entity, from funds that 
     are made available under that title, for the enhanced FMAP 
     (as defined in section 2105(b) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1397ee(b)) of the cost of the test and data reporting. 
     Such costs shall include the costs described in the second 
     sentence of clause (i).
       ``(3) Authorization for early head start.--There is 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary 
     to carry out this subsection with respect to blood lead 
     screening tests performed under this subsection on an infant 
     or child, and any data reporting with respect to such infant 
     or child, who is not eligible for coverage under title XIX or 
     XXI of the Social Security Act, or is not otherwise covered 
     under a health insurance plan.
       ``(4) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection 
     shall be construed as requiring a child eligible to 
     participate in the program described in subsection (a)(1) to 
     undergo a blood lead screening test if the child's parent or 
     guardian objects to the test on the ground that the test is 
     inconsistent with the parent's or guardian's religious 
     beliefs.
       ``(5) Head start.--The provisions of this subsection shall 
     apply to head start programs that include coverage, directly 
     or indirectly, for infants and toddlers under the age of 3 
     years.''.

     SEC. 3. LEAD POISONING SCREENING FOR SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL 
                   NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND 
                   CHILDREN.

       Section 17(d) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 
     1786(d)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Lead poisoning screening.--
       ``(A) In general.--A State agency shall--
       ``(i) determine whether an infant or child eligible to 
     participate in the program under this section has received a 
     blood lead screening test using a test that is appropriate 
     for age and risk factors upon the enrollment of the infant or 
     child in the program; and
       ``(ii) in the case of an infant or child who has not 
     received a blood lead screening test--

       ``(I) refer the infant or child for receipt of the test; 
     and
       ``(II) determine whether the infant or child receives the 
     test during a routine visit with a health care provider.

       ``(B) Screenings by state agencies.--
       ``(i) In general.--A State agency may (under contract or 
     otherwise) perform a blood lead screening test that is 
     appropriate for age and risk factors on an infant or child 
     who seeks to participate in the program.
       ``(ii) Reimbursement.--

       ``(I) Children enrolled in or eligible for medicaid.--On 
     the request of a State agency that performs or arranges for 
     the provision of a blood lead screening test under clause (i) 
     of an infant or child that is eligible for or receiving 
     medical assistance under a State plan under title XIX of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.), the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services, notwithstanding any other 
     provision of, or limitation under, title XIX of the Social 
     Security Act, shall reimburse the State agency, from funds 
     that are made available under that title, for the Federal 
     medical assistance percentage (as defined in section 1905(b) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(b)) of the cost 
     of the test and data reporting. Such costs shall include, if 
     determined to be desirable by the State agency, the costs of 
     providing screening through clinical laboratories certified 
     under section 353 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 
     263a), or purchasing, for use at sites providing services 
     under this section, blood lead testing instruments and 
     associated supplies approved for sale by the Food and Drug 
     Administration and used in compliance with such section 353.
       ``(II) Children enrolled in or eligible for schip.--In the 
     case of a blood lead screening test performed under clause 
     (i) (by the State agency or under contract with the State 
     agency) on an infant or child who is eligible for or 
     receiving medical assistance under a State plan under title 
     XXI of the Social Security Act, the Secretary of Health and 
     Human Services, notwithstanding any other provision of, or 
     limitation under, such title XXI, shall reimburse the State 
     agency, from funds that are made available under that title, 
     for the enhanced FMAP (as defined in section 2105(b) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397ee(b)) of the cost of the 
     test and data reporting. Such costs shall include the costs 
     described in the second sentence of subclause (I).

       ``(C) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out 
     this paragraph with respect to blood lead screening tests 
     performed under this paragraph on an infant or child, and any 
     data reporting with respect to such infant or child, who is 
     not eligible for coverage under title XIX or XXI of the 
     Social Security Act, or is not otherwise covered under a 
     health insurance plan.
       ``(D) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this paragraph 
     shall be construed as requiring a child eligible to 
     participate in the program under this section to undergo a 
     blood lead screening test if the child's parent or guardian 
     objects to the test on the ground that the test is 
     inconsistent with the parent's or guardian's religious 
     beliefs.''.

     SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the 
     amendments made by this Act take effect on the date that is 
     18 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
       (b) WIC and Early Head Start Waivers.--
       (1) In general.--A State agency or contractor administering 
     the program of assistance under the special supplemental 
     nutrition program for women, infants and children (WIC) under 
     section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 
     1786), or an entity carrying out activities under section 
     645A of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C 9840a) may be awarded a 
     waiver from the amendments made by sections 2 and 3 (as 
     applicable) if the State where the agency, contractor, or 
     entity is located establishes to the satisfaction of the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services, in accordance with 
     requirements and procedures recommended in accordance with 
     paragraph (2) to the Secretary by the Director of the Centers 
     for Disease Control and Prevention, in consultation with the 
     Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee 
     on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention, a plan for increasing 
     the number of blood lead screening tests of children enrolled 
     in the WIC and the Early Head Start programs in the State.
       (2) Development of waiver procedures and requirements.--Not 
     later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and 
     Prevention, in consultation with the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead 
     Poisoning Prevention, shall develop and recommend to the 
     Secretary of Health and Human Services criteria and 
     procedures (including a timetable for the submission of the 
     State plan described in paragraph (1)) for the award of 
     waivers under that paragraph.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH of Oregon:
  S. 1470. A bill to establish a demonstration program for school 
dropout prevention; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
Dropout Reduction Outreach Program Act of 2001 known as DROP. I have 
been deeply concerned about the high number of students dropping out of 
school in Oregon and around the country. We all know that for children 
at risk, having a relationship with a caring adult in school is often 
the only reason students choose to stay in school. But many of our 
schools, facing tight budgets, have had to cut guidance counselors, the 
very people whose top priority is helping our kids manage the difficult 
terrain of middle and high school academies and social life.
  This bill will provide funds to demonstrate what we know by instinct: 
that these guidance counselors can make a significant difference in 
reducing our dropout rates. Funding will help districts with 
particularly high dropout rates hire more counselors, and train 
teachers and administrators in the most effective methods for working 
with at-risk students.

[[Page S9879]]

  We have spent many hours in this chamber this year debating the way 
ahead for education in this country. We discussed and provided funding 
for many programs that should allow every child in this country the 
opportunity to receive a high quality education. And yet, recent 
numbers from my State project that nearly one in five children in 
Oregon will drop out of school before graduation.
  If you think this statistic is sobering, consider that the dropout 
rate for minority students is higher still. Dropout rates among 
Hispanic, Native American, and African American children in Oregon are 
all in double digits for each year of high school.
  We know some of the warning signs for dropping out: getting behind in 
coursework, working more than 15 hours each week, dysfunctional home 
life, substance abuse, pregnancy, and lack of parental support for 
education, but spotting these indicators and keeping students in school 
are not the same.
  With the economy increasingly dependent on highly trained technical 
workers, a high school diploma is now a minimum credential for success 
in American society. Keeping students in school is one way we can help 
America's young people achieve success in their lives, while 
maintaining our status as a world leader.
  The DROP Act will establish a multi-state demonstration program that 
will fund school counselor positions in middle and high schools with 
high dropout rates. it will also offer specialized training to guidance 
counselors and teachers who work with ``at risk'' students. The effects 
of these demonstration projects will be carefully monitored, and 
evaluations reported back to the Secretary of Education, who will then 
share them with Congress, states, and educators who wish to address 
this problem.
  While the DROP Act requires only a small financial commitment, it has 
the potential to have far-reaching implications as our society gears up 
to lead the world into the 21st century. I encourage my colleagues to 
support this legislation as a way to help all our nation's children 
achieve their highest potential.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. TORRICELLI (for himself, Mr. Reed, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. 
        Wellstone, Mr. Durbin, Mrs. Carnahan, and Mr. Lieberman):
  S. 1471. A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security 
Act to ensure that Children enrolled in the Medicaid and State 
children's health insurance program are identified and treated for lead 
poisoning; to the committee on Finance.
  Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I rise today along with my colleague, 
Senator Reed of Rhode Island, to introduce the Children's Lead 
Screening Accountability for Early-Intervention Act of 2001 and the 
Early Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Act of 2001.
  Lead poisoning is one of the dangerous environmental health hazards 
for young children. It is estimated that 890,000 children nationally 
suffer from elevated blood lead levels. Lead poisoning causes damage to 
the brain and nervous system, loss in IQ, impaired physical development 
and behavioral problems. High levels of exposure to lead can result in 
comas, convulsions and death. Poor and minority children are most at-
risk of lead poisoning because of inadequate diets and exposure to 
environmental hazards such as old housing.
  In an effort to alleviate this problem, in 1992, Congress instructed 
the Health Care Financing Administration to require States to lead 
screen Medicaid children under the age of two. The screening would have 
enabled the highest-risk children to be tested and treated before lead 
poisoning impaired their development. Despite the Federal law, however, 
a study from the General Accounting Office indicates that currently 
two-thirds of all Medicaid children remain unscreened and that only 
half the States have screening policies consistent with the law. In New 
Jersey, only 30% of children covered by Medicaid are tested.
  The Children's Lead Screening Accountability for Early-Intervention 
Act or Children's Lead SAFE Act will create a lead screening safety net 
that will, though the Medicaid and State Children's Health Insurance, 
SCHIP, programs, ensure that children enrolled in these programs 
receive blood lead screenings and appropriate follow-up care. 
Specifically, this legislation will require state Medicaid contracts to 
explicitly require health management organizations to comply with 
federal rules related to lead screening and treatment. The bill will 
expand Medicaid coverage to include lead treatment services and 
environmental investigations to determine the source of the poisoning.
  The Early Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Act of 2001 requires 
the Head Start, Early Head Start and Women, Infants and Children, WIC, 
programs to determine if enrolled children under age three have 
received a blood lead screening test appropriate for their age and risk 
factors. This legislation also requires that these programs provide and 
track referrals for any child who has not been screened for lead 
poisoning. Importantly, this legislation authorizes WIC, Head Start and 
Early Head Start programs to seek reimbursement through Medicaid or the 
SCHIP program for eligible children who have received a lead screening 
test.
  The health and safety of our children would be greatly enhanced with 
the passage of these important measures. Childhood lead poisoning is 
easily preventable and I hope my colleagues will join us in support of 
this legislation.
  At this time, I ask that the text of the Children's Lead Screening 
Accountability for Early-Intervention Act of 2001 be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1471

       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 ``Children's Lead Screening 
     Accountability For Early-Intervention Act of 2001'' or the 
     ``Children's Lead SAFE Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
       (1) lead poisoning remains a serious environmental risk, 
     especially to the health of young children;
       (2) childhood lead poisoning can cause reductions in IQ, 
     attention span, reading, and learning disabilities, and other 
     growth and behavior problems;
       (3) children under the age of 6 are at the greatest risk of 
     suffering the effects of lead poisoning because of the 
     sensitivity of their developing brains and nervous systems, 
     while children under the age of 3 are especially at risk due 
     to their stage of development and hand-to-mouth activities;
       (4) poor children and minority children are at 
     substantially higher risk of lead poisoning;
       (5) three-fourths of all children ages 1 through 5 found to 
     have an elevated blood lead level in a Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention nationally representative sample were 
     enrolled in or targeted by Federal health care programs, 
     specifically the medicaid program, the special supplemental 
     nutrition program for women, infants, and children (WIC), and 
     the community health centers programs under section 330 of 
     the Public Health Service Act, equating to an estimated 
     688,000 children nationwide;
       (6) the General Accounting Office estimates that \2/3\ of 
     the 688,000 children who have elevated blood lead levels and 
     are enrolled in or targeted by Federal health care programs 
     have never been screened for lead;
       (7) although the Health Care Financing Administration has 
     required mandatory blood lead screenings for children 
     enrolled in the medicaid program who are not less than 1 nor 
     more than 5 years of age, less than 20 percent of these 
     children have received such screenings;
       (8) the Health Care Financing Administration mandatory 
     screening policy has not been effective, or sufficient, to 
     properly identify and screen children enrolled in the 
     medicaid program who are at risk;
       (9) only about \1/2\ of State programs have screening 
     policies consistent with Federal policy; and
       (10) adequate treatment services are not uniformly 
     available for children with elevated blood lead levels.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to create a lead 
     screening safety net that will, through the medicaid and 
     State children's health insurance program, ensure that 
     children enrolled in those programs receive blood lead 
     screenings and appropriate followup care.

     SEC. 3. INCREASED LEAD POISONING SCREENINGS AND TREATMENTS 
                   UNDER THE MEDICAID PROGRAM.

       (a) Reporting Requirement.--Section 1902(a)(43)(D) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(43)(D)) is amended--
       (1) in clause (iii), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in clause (iv), by striking the semicolon and inserting 
     ``, and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(v) the number of children who are under the age of 3 and 
     enrolled in the State plan

[[Page S9880]]

     under this title and the number of those children who have 
     received a blood lead screening test;''.
       (b) Mandatory Screening Requirements.--Section 1902(a) of 
     the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (64), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (2) in paragraph (65), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (65) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(66) provide that each contract entered into between the 
     State and an entity (including a health insuring organization 
     and a medicaid managed care organization) that is responsible 
     for the provision (directly or through arrangements with 
     providers of services) of medical assistance under the State 
     plan shall provide for--
       ``(A) compliance with mandatory blood lead screening 
     requirements that are consistent with prevailing guidelines 
     of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for such 
     screening; and
       ``(B) coverage of qualified lead treatment services 
     described in section 1905(x) including diagnosis, treatment, 
     and follow-up furnished for children with elevated blood lead 
     levels in accordance with prevailing guidelines of the 
     Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.''.
       (c) Reimbursement for Treatment of Children With Elevated 
     Blood Lead Levels.--Section 1905 of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1396d) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (26), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (27) as paragraph (28); and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (26) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(27) qualified lead treatment services (as defined in 
     subsection (x)); and''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(x)(1) In this subsection:
       ``(A) The term `qualified lead treatment services' means 
     the following:
       ``(i) Lead-related medical management, as defined in 
     subparagraph (B).
       ``(ii) Lead-related case management, as defined in 
     subparagraph (C), for a child described in paragraph (2).
       ``(iii) Lead-related anticipatory guidance, as defined in 
     subparagraph (D), provided as part of--
       ``(I) prenatal services;
       ``(II) early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and 
     treatment services (EPSDT) described in subsection (r) and 
     available under subsection (a)(4)(B) (including as described 
     and available under implementing regulations and guidelines) 
     to individuals enrolled in the State plan under this title 
     who have not attained age 21; and
       ``(III) routine pediatric preventive services.
       ``(B) The term `lead-related medical management' means the 
     provision and coordination of the diagnostic, treatment, and 
     follow-up services provided for a child diagnosed with an 
     elevated blood lead level (EBLL) that includes--
       ``(i) a clinical assessment, including a physical 
     examination and medically indicated tests (in addition to 
     diagnostic blood lead level tests) and other diagnostic 
     procedures to determine the child's developmental, 
     neurological, nutritional, and hearing status, and the 
     extent, duration, and possible source of the child's exposure 
     to lead;
       ``(ii) repeat blood lead level tests furnished when 
     medically indicated for purposes of monitoring the blood lead 
     concentrations in the child;
       ``(iii) pharmaceutical services, including chelation agents 
     and other drugs, vitamins, and minerals prescribed for 
     treatment of an EBLL;
       ``(iv) medically indicated inpatient services including 
     pediatric intensive care and emergency services;
       ``(v) medical nutrition therapy when medically indicated by 
     a nutritional assessment, that shall be furnished by a 
     dietitian or other nutrition specialist who is authorized to 
     provide such services under State law;
       ``(vi) referral--
       ``(I) when indicated by a nutritional assessment, to the 
     State agency or contractor administering the program of 
     assistance under the special supplemental nutrition program 
     for women, infants and children (WIC) under section 17 of the 
     Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786) and coordination 
     of clinical management with that program; and
       ``(II) when indicated by a clinical or developmental 
     assessment, to the State agency responsible for early 
     intervention and special education programs under the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 
     et seq.); and
       ``(vii) environmental investigation, as defined in 
     subparagraph (E).
       ``(C) The term `lead-related case management' means the 
     coordination, provision, and oversight of the nonmedical 
     services for a child with an EBLL necessary to achieve 
     reductions in the child's blood lead levels, improve the 
     child's nutrition, and secure needed resources and services 
     to protect the child by a case manager trained to develop and 
     oversee a multi-disciplinary plan for a child with an EBLL or 
     by a childhood lead poisoning prevention program, as defined 
     by the Secretary. Such services include--
       ``(i) assessing the child's environmental, nutritional, 
     housing, family, and insurance status and identifying the 
     family's immediate needs to reduce lead exposure through an 
     initial home visit;
       ``(ii) developing a multidisciplinary case management plan 
     of action that addresses the provision and coordination of 
     each of the following items as appropriate--
       ``(I) determination of whether or not such services are 
     covered under the State plan under this title;
       ``(II) lead-related medical management of an EBLL 
     (including environmental investigation);
       ``(III) nutrition services;
       ``(IV) family lead education;
       ``(V) housing;
       ``(VI) early intervention services;
       ``(VII) social services; and
       ``(VIII) other services or programs that are indicated by 
     the child's clinical status and environmental, social, 
     educational, housing, and other needs;
       ``(iii) assisting the child (and the child's family) in 
     gaining access to covered and non-covered services in the 
     case management plan developed under clause (ii);
       ``(iv) providing technical assistance to the provider that 
     is furnishing lead-related medical management for the child; 
     and
       ``(v) implementation and coordination of the case 
     management plan developed under clause (ii) through home 
     visits, family lead education, and referrals.
       ``(D) The term `lead-related anticipatory guidance' means 
     education and information for families of children and 
     pregnant women enrolled in the State plan under this title 
     about prevention of childhood lead poisoning that addresses 
     the following topics:
       ``(i) The importance of lead screening tests and where and 
     how to obtain such tests.
       ``(ii) Identifying lead hazards in the home.
       ``(iii) Specialized cleaning, home maintenance, 
     nutritional, and other measures to minimize the risk of 
     childhood lead poisoning.
       ``(iv) The rights of families under the Residential Lead-
     Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 4851 et 
     seq.).
       ``(E) The term `environmental investigation' means the 
     process of determining the source of a child's exposure to 
     lead by an individual that is certified or registered to 
     perform such investigations under State or local law, 
     including the collection and analysis of information and 
     environmental samples from a child's living environment. For 
     purposes of this subparagraph, a child's living environment 
     includes the child's residence or residences, residences of 
     frequently visited caretakers, relatives, and playmates, and 
     the child's day care site. Such investigations shall be 
     conducted in accordance with the standards of the Department 
     of Housing and Urban Development for the evaluation and 
     control of lead-based paint hazards in housing and in 
     compliance with State and local health agency standards for 
     environmental investigation and reporting.
       ``(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)(A)(ii), a child 
     described in this paragraph is a child who--
       ``(A) has attained 6 months but has not attained 6 years of 
     age; and
       ``(B) has been identified as having a blood lead level that 
     equals or exceeds 20 micrograms per deciliter (or after 2 
     consecutive tests, equals or exceeds 15 micrograms per 
     deciliter, or the applicable number of micrograms designated 
     for such tests under prevailing guidelines of the Centers for 
     Disease Control and Prevention).''.
       (d) Enhanced Match for Data Communications System.--Section 
     1903(a)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396b(a)(3)) 
     is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``plus'' at the end 
     and inserting ``and''; and
       (2) by inserting after subparagraph (D), the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(E)(i) 90 percent of so much of the sums expended during 
     such quarter as are attributable to the design, development, 
     or installation of an information retrieval system that may 
     be easily accessed and used by other federally-funded means-
     tested public benefit programs to determine whether a child 
     is enrolled in the State plan under this title and whether an 
     enrolled child has received mandatory early and periodic 
     screening, diagnostic, and treatment services, as described 
     in section 1905(r); and
       ``(ii) 75 percent of so much of the sums expended during 
     such quarter as are attributable to the operation of a system 
     (whether such system is operated directly by the State or by 
     another person under a contract with the State) of the type 
     described in clause (i); plus''.
       (e) Report.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
     acting through the Administrator of the Health Care Financing 
     Administration, annually shall report to Congress on the 
     number of children enrolled in the medicaid program under 
     title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) 
     who have received a blood lead screening test during the 
     prior fiscal year, noting the percentage that such children 
     represent as compared to all children enrolled in that 
     program.
       (f) Emergency Measures.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the Secretary of 
     Health and Human Services or the State agency administering 
     the State plan under title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) shall use funds provided under title XIX 
     of that Act to reimburse a State or entity for expenditures 
     for medically necessary activities in the home of a lead-
     poisoned child with an EBLL of at least 20, or a pregnant 
     woman with an EBLL of at least 20, to prevent additional 
     exposure to lead, including specialized cleaning of

[[Page S9881]]

     lead-contaminated dust, emergency relocation, safe repair of 
     peeling paint, dust control, and other activities that reduce 
     lead exposure. Such reimbursement, when provided by the State 
     agency administering the State plan under title XIX of the 
     Social Security Act, shall be considered medical assistance 
     for purposes of section 1903(a) of such Act.
       (2) Limitation.--Not more than $1,000 in expenditures for 
     the emergency measures described in paragraph (1) may be 
     incurred on behalf of a child or pregnant woman to which that 
     paragraph applies.
       (g) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this Act or any 
     amendment made by this Act shall be construed as requiring a 
     child enrolled in the State medicaid program under title XIX 
     of the Social Security Act to undergo a lead blood screening 
     test if the child's parent or guardian objects to the test on 
     the ground that the test is inconsistent with the parent's or 
     guardian's religious beliefs.

     SEC. 4. BONUS PROGRAM FOR IMPROVEMENT OF CHILDHOOD LEAD 
                   SCREENING RATES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     (in this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') may 
     establish a program to improve the blood lead screening rates 
     of States for children under the age of 3 enrolled in the 
     medicaid program.
       (b) Payments.--If the Secretary establishes a program under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary, using State-specific blood 
     lead screening data, shall, subject to the availability of 
     appropriations, annually pay a State an amount determined as 
     follows:
       (1) $25 per each 2 year-old child enrolled in the medicaid 
     program in the State who has received the minimum required 
     (for that age) screening blood lead level tests (capillary or 
     venous samples) to determine the presence of elevated blood 
     lead levels, as established by the Centers for Disease 
     Control and Prevention, if the State rate for such screenings 
     exceeds 65 but does not exceed 75 percent of all 2 year-old 
     children in the State.
       (2) $50 per each such child who has received such minimum 
     required tests if the State rate for such screenings exceeds 
     75 but does not exceed 85 percent of all 2 year-old children 
     in the State.
       (3) $75 per each such child who has received such minimum 
     required tests if the State rate for such screenings exceeds 
     85 percent of all 2 year-old children in the State.
       (c) Use of Bonus Funds.--Funds awarded to a State under 
     subsection (b) shall only be used--
       (1) by the State department of health in the case of a 
     child with an elevated blood lead level who is enrolled in 
     medicaid or another Federal means-tested program designed to 
     reduce the source of the child's exposure to lead; or
       (2) in accordance with guidelines for the use of such funds 
     developed by the Secretary in collaboration with the 
     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $30,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2002 through 2006.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION TO USE SCHIP FUNDS FOR BLOOD LEAD 
                   SCREENING.

       (a) Optional Application To SCHIP.--
       (1) In general.--Section 2107(e)(1) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1397gg(e)(1)) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) At State option, section 1902(a)(66) (relating to 
     blood lead screening and coverage of qualified lead treatment 
     services defined in section 1905(x)).''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 2110(a) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397jj(a)) is amended--
       (A) by redesignating paragraph (28) as paragraph (29); and
       (B) by inserting after paragraph (27) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(28) qualified lead treatment services (as defined in 
     section 1905(x)), but only if the State has elected under 
     section 2107(e)(1)(E) to apply section 1902(a)(66) to the 
     State child health plan under this title.''.
       (b) Inclusion in Medicaid Reporting Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--Section 1902(a)(43)(D)(v) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(a)(43)(D)(v)), as added by 
     section 3(a)(3), is amended by inserting ``or, if the State 
     has elected under section 2107(e)(1)(E) to apply paragraph 
     (66) to the State child health plan under title XXI, in the 
     State plan under title XXI,'' after ``this title''.
       (2) Report to congress.--Section 3(e) of this Act is 
     amended--
       (A) by inserting ``or in the State children's health 
     insurance program under title XXI of that Act (42 U.S.C 
     1397aa et seq.)'' after ``(42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.)''; and
       (B) by striking ``that program'' and inserting ``those 
     programs''.

     SEC. 6. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       This Act and the amendments made by this Act take effect on 
     the date that is 18 months after the date of enactment of 
     this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HARKIN (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
  S. 1474. A bill to amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
Rodenticide Act to extend and improve the collection of maintenance 
fees, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, 
Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Pesticide 
Maintenance Fees Reauthorization Act of 2001 on behalf of myself and my 
friend, Senator Lugar. This legislation reauthorizes several existing 
legislative provisions addressing pesticide fees.
  As Senator Lugar and my colleagues know, the legal authorization for 
the collection of so-called maintenance fees for the reregistration of 
pesticides expires at the end of this month. This expiration means that 
EPA will face a significant funding shortfall as it continues its 
implementation of FQPA.
  This legislation has been negotiated between the Senate and House 
Agriculture Committees and representatives of the environmental and 
agri-chemical industry. It would require industry to pay $20 million a 
year to reevaluate pesticides approved by EPA prior to 1984. In return, 
a controversial proposal by the Environmental Protection Agency to more 
than quadruple the amount of fees paid by the pesticide industry will 
be shelved.
  The $20 million per year represents an increase over the previous fee 
schedule that had ranged from $14 to $17.6 million a year. $20 million 
reflects the amount of money that EPA says is necessary to pay the 
salaries and expenses of the 200 employees that review older 
pesticides.
  If this reauthorization were not provided, EPA would have to make up 
the money from elsewhere in its budget or layoff some of those 
employees. If that were to happen there is widespread concern that 
EPA's review of pesticides would slow down significantly. EPA has been 
charged with reviewing all pesticides to make sure they are safe for 
the environment and safe for kids. The last we need is for EPA to lose 
the workers vital to accomplishing that.
  I hope that the Senate will be able to move quickly on this 
legislation, and I thank Senator Lugar for working with me to get it 
introduced.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BREAUX (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 1475. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
an appropriate and permanent tax structure for investments in the 
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the possessions of the United States, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BREAUX. Mr. President, I am proud to be an original co-sponsor of 
the Economic Revitalization Tax Act of 2001. This legislation is 
designed to revitalize one of America's most important economic 
partners. As we discuss economic stimulus measures for our Nation 
during these difficult times, it is important the we do not leave 
behind the 3.9 million U.S. citizens of the Commonwealth of Puerto 
Rico.
  Puerto Rico purchases over $16 billion a year in goods and services 
from the rest of the United States. This is more than much larger 
nations such as Russia, China, Italy and Brazil. A strong economy in 
Puerto Rico helps generate over 320,000 jobs in the U.S. mainland. It 
is important that we maintain this economic partnership as strong as 
ever.
  The economy of Puerto Rico was weak even before the current national 
crisis. Since the beginning of the year, plant closures have been 
announced affecting over 7 percent of the manufacturing workforce. 
Since Congress repealed tax incentives for investment in Puerto Rico in 
October 1996, manufacturing employment has declined by over 15 
percent--more than any state in the U.S. mainland. Employment in other 
sectors of the economy has not increased enough to offset the loss in 
manufacturing jobs. Consequently, total employment in Puerto Rico has 
declined over the last five years. By contrast, during the same period, 
jobs increased by over 10 percent in the average state, and no state 
experienced a net job loss.
  The negative economic impacts of the current state of national alert 
will be felt most in those regions of the country that are dependent on 
tourism and air transportation. As a small island, Puerto Rico is four 
times more dependent on external trade as a share of GDP than the U.S. 
mainland, and 45 percent of Puerto Rico's trade is transported by air, 
compared to only 5 percent for the U.S. American Airlines which employs 
thousands at its major hub in Puerto Rico will be dramatically affected 
by the reduction in air travel.
  Tourist expenditures are an essential component of Puerto Rico's 
economy.

[[Page S9882]]

Occupancy rates at Puerto Rico hotels have already been cut in half, 
with more losses expected as convention cancellations mount. Absent a 
turnaround, a significant portion of Puerto Rico's economy is directly 
at risk, with ripple effects beyond the tourism sector.
  Puerto Rico's economy is closely linked to the U.S. economy. When the 
United States goes into recession, the impact is immediately felt on 
the Island where the rate of unemployment currently is running at about 
13 percent. Retail sales are down over 30 percent since the terrorist 
acts.
  It is essential to adopt measures to help Puerto Rico, like the rest 
of the country, recover economically and financially. Proposed national 
economic recovery legislation will not, without special provisions, 
help Puerto Rico. For example, because Puerto Rico is considered a 
separate taxing jurisdiction, investment tax credits and other business 
incentives do not apply to investments in Puerto Rico.
  ``The Economic Revitalization Tax Act of 2001,'' will materially 
assist in mitigating the impact of the expected economic losses in 
Puerto Rico as a result of the tragic recent events, as well as halt 
the continuing loss of manufacturing jobs due to the 1996 repeal of 
U.S. tax incentives. This legislation would provide a new tax regime to 
encourage American companies to retain their Puerto Rico operations and 
to re-invest profits earned in Puerto Rico and the U.S. possessions in 
the United States on a tax preferred basis. This will not only help 
Puerto Rico directly, but it will also help the American economy by 
returning profits to the U.S. where they can be invested in other job 
creating activities.
  Puerto Rico is a vital partner in the American family. The new 
administration of Governor Sila Maria Calderon, is bringing a renewed 
vision of a prosperous Puerto Rico and is implementing a coherent 
development plan that will make that vision a reality. Governor 
Calderon understands that reform of the Commonwealth government and its 
economic development policies are necessary for Puerto Rico's economic 
development. She is doing this in close collaboration with business and 
community leaders in Puerto Rico.
  This proposal is a win-win situation for Puerto Rico and for the 
American worker and taxpayer. We help create jobs in Puerto Rico, and 
those jobs will help create jobs in the U.S. mainland.
  Please join me in supporting this legislation.

                          ____________________