[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 130 (Monday, October 7, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10041-S10051]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 3063. A bill to establish a Citizens Health Care Working Group to 
facilitate public debate about how to improve the health care system 
for Americans and to provide for a vote by Congress on the 
recommendations that are derived from this debate; to the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I join with Senator Orrin Hatch, one 
of the most caring and thoughtful public officials I have ever known, 
in offering a bipartisan roadmap to creating a health care system that 
works for all Americans. Our country has been trying to find such a 
path since President Harry Truman's proposal to cover all Americans was 
voted down in 1945. I believe the Wyden-Hatch proposal can succeed 
after 57 years of failure because our bipartisan plan begins with the 
public discussing and deciding their health care priorities, followed 
by a guarantee Congress will actually vote on the recommendations that 
result from this grassroots debate.
  This approach has never been tried before. Now, when major health 
laws are written, politicians sit down and prescribe what benefits will 
be offered, and then try to come up with the money to pay for them. 
After the politicians write their plans, the special interest lobbies 
start attacking one feature or another through shrill television 
commercials. Pretty soon, the public gets understandably confused, the 
chance for building consensus is lost, and important health care needs 
go unmet.
  The 280 million Americans whose survival depends on quality, 
affordable health care have never been given the chance to shape their 
health care future before the special interest lobbyists weigh in. The 
Wyden-Hatch bill changes that. Under our proposal, the public gets to 
jump-start health reform by stating their priorities at the outset, 
rather than being treated as an afterthought. We believe our 
legislation can serve as an illuminated route to a health care system 
where each American has the ability to obtain quality, affordable 
health care coverage. We placed three signposts on our roadmap to 
provide guidance to the American people and their elected officials as 
they make the tough choices inherent in tackling health care reform.
  At the first signpost, the public is given an extensive opportunity, 
in their home communities and on line, to state their personal health 
care priorities and how they should be paid for. In addition, the 
public will be asked to look beyond their personal needs, to those of 
the community at large, and how those needs should be paid for.
  Our legislation forthrightly asks the questions that must be answered 
to have meaningful health reform--questions such as: What kind of 
health care do you want most? How much are you willing to pay? How 
should costs be contained without sacrificing the quality of care? 
Should the Government or private businesses be required to pay a 
portion of your costs? How about those of your neighbors?
  Our national Government has never directly asked the public these 
questions. After asking these questions, the Government ought to keep 
quiet for a bit and listen to the people because without some sense of 
the public's view, it is always going to be virtually impossible to 
create a health care system that works for everyone, with the consensus 
that is needed to get it done.
  To ask the key questions and follow up on the suggestions given by 
the American people, the Wyden-Hatch legislation creates a Citizens' 
Health Care Working Group. The Working Group is made up of a 
representative cross-section of our people. It is not just another 
Washington, DC commission of so-called policy experts.
  The Working Group directs the public participation portion of this 
proposal. For example, as a guide to help the public in formulating 
their views on the tough choices that lie ahead, the Wyden-Hatch 
legislation directs the Working Group to prepare and make widely 
available a ``Health Report to the American People.''
  The legislation we have authored requires that this report be written 
in understandable language and describe the cost and availability of 
the major public and private health choices now available--and also 
contain enough information so the public can create alternatives. Here 
are the kinds of issues we want to address: ``If covering liver 
transplants under government health programs requires cutting other 
services, what services are you willing to cut, or would you rather not 
have liver transplants covered? If government coverage of long-term 
care for the elderly would require workers to begin contributing to the 
program at age 40, is it still worth it to you?''
  These are moral choices about what health care the public has a right 
to expect. These are economic choices that affect the finances of our 
families. These are legal and social choices that will be difficult for 
our people to make. The Wyden-Hatch proposal is built around the 
proposition that these choices are too important to duck any longer.
  After establishing a sense of how the public feels about these hard 
choices, the legislation directs that the Working Group move to the 
second signpost on our roadmap. There the Working Group is to take the 
ideas offered by the American people, and translate these views into 
recommendations for our elected officials to create a health care 
system that works for all. With the Working Group's involvement in the 
public participation requirement of this legislation, we believe they 
are the right people to take this historic step: to synthesize the 
opinions and information provided by the public and then present a 
faithful picture to Congress.
  At the third signpost, the Congress takes the recommendations from 
the Working Group and utilizes the legislative process to develop one 
or more plans for the recommendations, with a guarantee to the public 
that the plans will be voted on in both Houses of Congress. We believe 
that the assurance that Congress will vote after the public's will is 
expressed provides an added measure of credibility for this 
legislation. Simply put, people will be able to see their voices, their 
participation, lead to actual votes on the floors of both Houses of 
Congress to create a health care system that works for all. With these 
steps I have described, our country can as never before discuss, decide 
and deliver on health care reforms.
  I know there will be many questions about this proposal, and I'll try 
to answer them in the coming days. I'd like to briefly answer just one 
question I've already been asked: ``Why now? This is the end of the 
Congressional session; we are all concerned about the possibility of 
war with Iraq. Why are you putting this before Congress today?''

  My answer is that the lack of decent health care for so many 
Americans,

[[Page S10042]]

and the skyrocketing costs of coverage for insured Americans, threaten 
countless lives and our economic security just as tenaciously as any 
foreign enemy our Nation has ever faced. Just as we are beginning a 
debate about how best to address the Nation's security interests, it is 
high time Congress resumed the debate about how to address the 
inequities and failures of the American health care system.
  On health care, our families can't afford to wait any longer. 
Congress is completing another session without significant progress on 
major health care issues. A demographic tsunami of baby boomer retirees 
is coming soon. It is increasingly evident that piecemeal health 
reform--considering prescription drugs one day, patients' rights 
legislation the next, something else after that--isn't working.
  I have no intention on giving up on any one of those important issues 
when it's possible to get Congress to consider them separately. I still 
believe the bipartisan prescription drug bill I authored with Olympia 
Snowe could bring the Senate together and help seniors get and afford 
prescription medicine now.
  Yet is clear that because health care is like an ecosystem, with one 
part affecting all others, it is extremely difficult to make real 
progress on a single important issue without factoring in the way it 
will ripple through our entire health care system.
  So as the Congress pushes ahead on prescriptions and other urgent 
needs, let us simultaneously reopen the debate about creating a health 
care system that works for all. That debate stopped in 1994, and needs 
to begin again. The Wyden-Hatch bill provides an opportunity to reopen 
this debate, and by introducing our bill now we believe it will be 
ready for full Congressional deliberation when the next Congress begins 
in January.
  One way or another, it is urgent that Congress find a way to do 
better by the people's health care needs.
  My constituents at home in Oregon make this case constantly. At town 
meetings, Chamber of Commerce lunches, labor halls, non-profit board 
meetings, after church coffee hours, and especially at my ``sidewalk 
office hours'' where I just set up a card table to listen, they ask, 
``Ron, when's Congress going to get going on health care and help us 
out?''
  One Oregon business after another has been telling me their health 
premiums are going up by as much as 20 percent a year. The number of 
uninsured is going up, with many of these individuals working at small 
businesses whose owners desperately want to offer health coverage and 
can't figure out how to do it and keep their doors open. Many 
physicians have been leaving government health programs because of 
inadequate reimbursements. Thousands and thousands of pages of health 
care regulations now exist and the system is almost choking on all the 
bureaucracy.
  We know that America's health care system is scientifically 
prodigious. Every day our dedicated and caring health care providers 
are performing miracles. Last year more than $1.4 trillion was spent on 
health care in America. Divide that sum by the number of Americans, and 
there would be enough for every family of four to receive more than 
$18,000 for health care. With all this money, and so much talent and 
creativity in America, shouldn't it be possible to create a health 
system that works for everyone?
  Senator Hatch and I believe it is. We know it will be hard, but we 
believe it can be done if our roadmap is used.
  For example, to achieve real reform our elected officials are going 
to have to reject the blame game. Republicans can no longer say the 
problem in health care is primarily the trial lawyers. Democrats can no 
longer say the problem in health care is primarily the insurance 
companies. All--let me repeat, all--of the powerful lobbies are going 
to have to accept some changes they have rejected in the past if 
America is to have a health care system that works for everyone. I 
believe that's what we'll hear from the public if they're given the 
chance to discuss and decide their health care priorities as the Wyden-
Hatch legislation envisions.
  Before I wrap up, I wish to offer a few thank yous.
  The first thank you is to the people of Oregon. They have honored me 
with a chance to serve, and I get up every morning feeling like the 
luckiest guy around. It was not very long ago, as codirector of the 
Oregonian Gray Panthers, I was driving to senior citizens meetings in a 
beat-up station wagon, and I never thought I would have the privilege 
of being able to serve in this capacity.
  Oregonians can see I have modeled much of this legislation after the 
debate that Oregon has had on health care. And we are proud that we are 
the first of the initiatives to ask the tough questions.
  Oregonians began asking those difficult questions more than a decade 
ago in community meetings, for one reason: Gov. John Kitzhaber, an 
emergency room physician, insisted that we do it. He deserves great 
credit for his efforts, his courage, and his tenacity. When I told him 
I was going to push Congress to build on Oregon's public process, the 
Governor said: Go for it.
  Senator Hatch--and I note that Senator Hatch is in the Chamber this 
morning--could easily have said he wanted no part of this whole 
discussion. Senator Hatch has written several vital health care laws, 
from his S-CHIP legislation, to his community health centers bill, to 
the Hatch-Waxman legislation, to make sure there are pharmaceuticals 
available for the public, and that they are affordable. All of those 
pieces of legislation have made a huge contribution.
  Senator Hatch has about the fullest plate in the Senate, with his 
Judiciary and Intelligence responsibilities, but he and Patricia Knight 
and Patricia DeLoatche have been thoughtful and patient as we went 
through draft after draft of this proposal in an effort to start the 
discussion now. I want Senator Hatch to know how grateful I am to him.
  Dr. Paul Ellwood, who founded the Jackson Hole Health Group, has been 
working for more than three decades to create a health system that 
works for everybody. Now, when he could be enjoying retirement, riding 
horses in beautiful Wyoming, he is still bringing together health care 
policymakers, at 7 o'clock on a Sunday morning, in an effort to try to 
find a consensus on the kinds of common ground that Senator Hatch and I 
are pursuing.
  Dr. Ellwood has been so helpful in the development of this proposal 
and his own new plan called Heroic Pathways, which encourages the use 
of information technologies and evidence-based medicine, which is a 
fancy way of saying health care that actually works. I am of the view 
that Dr. Ellwood's ideas have great potential. To Paul and Barbara 
Ellwood, I say this morning, we would not be here today without you.
  In my office, Stephanie Kennan and Carole Grunberg kept us tethered 
to reality, and Ms. Daphne Edwards, a young lawyer in the legislative 
counsel's office, produced eight separate drafts of this legislation 
alone.
  Finally, I went into public life because I have always believed if 
people could not get affordable, quality health care, they were not in 
a position to be able to do much of anything else. Since those Gray 
Panther days, I have believed that it is wrong for people in this 
country to die because they could not get health care or because it 
came too late.
  America is now hemorrhaging dollars into a health care system that 
simply does not work at all for too many people. The longer people go 
on dying needlessly, and the longer prosperity and security allude our 
families, the less America looks like the America of our dreams. No one 
I know thinks it should be so easy to slip through the cracks in our 
health care system. No one I know believes America is supposed to be a 
place where people forfeit their well-being for doing honest work that 
just does not pay enough for good medical care.
  The Wyden-Hatch legislation is a chance to move toward America as it 
is meant to be. People can voice their vision for health care in 
America. Their voices can count. Their vision can come to pass.
  So today I ask the Senate to give our people this opportunity. The 
Wyden-Hatch bill provides a roadmap. The great people of this country, 
working with their public servants, can use it as a guide to a health 
care system that works for everyone.
  Mr. President, I see that my colleague is on the floor this morning. 
I

[[Page S10043]]

wrap up by again expressing my appreciation to Senator Hatch. I have 
come to the conclusion that if you want to get anything important done, 
particularly in health care, it has to be bipartisan. Senator Hatch and 
I have been talking about this health care reform for an awfully long 
time. He has been extraordinarily patient--he and his staff--in working 
with me. I think we bring to the Senate today a chance, as we end this 
session--a session where there has not been the progress the people 
deserve on health care--a chance to move forward in a bipartisan way. I 
am just especially grateful to my colleague from the State of Utah, who 
is one of the most caring people I have known in public life, for all 
his help.
  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. 3063

       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 ``Health Care That Works for 
     All Americans Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) In order to improve the health care system, the 
     American public must engage in an informed national public 
     debate to make choices about the services they want covered, 
     what health care coverage they want, and how they are willing 
     to pay for coverage.
       (2) More than a trillion dollars annually is spent on the 
     health care system, yet--
       (A) 41,000,000 Americans are uninsured;
       (B) insured individuals do not always have access to 
     essential, effective services to improve and maintain their 
     health; and
       (C) employers, who cover over 170,000,000 Americans, find 
     providing coverage increasingly difficult because of rising 
     costs and double digit premium increases.
       (3) Despite increases in medical care spending that are 
     greater than the rate of inflation, population growth, and 
     Gross Domestic Product growth, there has not been a 
     commensurate improvement in our health status as a nation.
       (4) Health care costs for even just 1 member of a family 
     can be catastrophic, resulting in medical bills potentially 
     harming the economic stability of the entire family.
       (5) Common life occurrences can jeopardize the ability of a 
     family to retain private coverage or jeopardize access to 
     public coverage.
       (6) Innovations in health care access, coverage, and 
     quality of care, including the use of technology, have often 
     come from States, local communities, and private sector 
     organizations, but more creative policies could tap this 
     potential.
       (7) Despite our Nation's wealth, the health care system 
     does not provide coverage to all Americans who want it.

     SEC. 3. PURPOSES.

       The purposes of this Act are--
       (1) to provide for a nationwide public debate about 
     improving the health care system to provide every American 
     with the ability to obtain quality, affordable health care 
     coverage; and
       (2) to provide for a vote by Congress on the 
     recommendations that result from the debate.

     SEC. 4. CITIZENS' HEALTH CARE WORKING GROUP.

       (a) Establishment.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, shall establish 
     an entity to be known as the Citizens' Health Care Working 
     Group (referred to in this Act as the ``Working Group'').
       (b) Appointment.--Not later than 45 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Speaker and Minority Leader of the 
     House of Representatives and the Majority Leader and Minority 
     Leader of the Senate (in this section referred to as the 
     ``leadership'') shall each appoint individuals to serve as 
     members of the Working Group in accordance with subsections 
     (c), (d), and (e).
       (c) Membership Criteria.--
       (1) Appointed members.--
       (A) Separate appointments.--The Speaker of the House of 
     Representatives jointly with the Minority Leader of the House 
     of Representatives, and the Majority Leader of the Senate 
     jointly with the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall each 
     appoint 1 member of the Working Group described in 
     subparagraphs (A), (G), (J), (K), and (M) of paragraph (2).
       (B) Joint appointments.--Members of the Working Group 
     described in subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), and (N) 
     of paragraph (2) shall be appointed jointly by the 
     leadership.
       (C) Combined appointments.--Members of the Working Group 
     described in subparagraphs (H) and (L) shall be appointed in 
     the following manner:
       (i) One member of the Working Group in each of such 
     subparagraphs shall be appointed jointly by the leadership.
       (ii) The remaining appointments of the members in each of 
     such subparagraphs shall be divided equally such that the 
     Speaker of the House of Representatives jointly with the 
     Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, and the 
     Majority Leader of the Senate jointly with the Minority 
     Leader of the Senate each appoint an equal number of members.
       (2) Categories of appointed members.--Members of the 
     Working Group shall be appointed as follows:
       (A) 2 members shall be patients or family members of 
     patients who, at least 1 year prior to the date of enactment 
     of this Act, have had no health insurance.
       (B) 1 member shall be a representative of children.
       (C) 1 member shall be a representative of the mentally ill.
       (D) 1 member shall be a representative of the disabled.
       (E) 1 member shall be over the age of 65 and a beneficiary 
     under the medicare program established under title XVIII of 
     the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.).
       (F) 1 member shall be a recipient of benefits under the 
     medicaid program under title XIX of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.).
       (G) 2 members shall be State health officials.
       (H) 3 members shall be employers, including--
       (i) 1 large employer (an employer who employed 50 or more 
     employees on business days during the preceding calendar year 
     and who employed at least 50 employees on the first of the 
     year);
       (ii) 1 small employer (an employer who employed an average 
     of at least 2 employees but less than 50 employees on 
     business days in the preceding calendar year and who employs 
     at least 2 employees on the first of the year); and
       (iii) 1 multi-state employer.
       (I) 1 member shall be a representative of labor.
       (J) 2 members shall be health insurance issuers.
       (K) 2 members shall be health care providers.
       (L) 5 members shall be appointed as follows:
       (i) 1 economist.
       (ii) 1 academician.
       (iii) 1 health policy researcher.
       (iv) 1 individual with expertise in pharmacoeconomics.
       (v) 1 health technology expert.
       (M) 2 members shall be representatives of community leaders 
     who have developed State or local community solutions to the 
     problems addressed by the Working Group.
       (N) 1 member shall be a representative of a medical school.
       (3) Secretary.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     or the designee of the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     shall be a member of the Working Group.
       (d) Prohibited Appointments.--Members of the Working Group 
     shall not include members of Congress or other elected 
     government officials (Federal, State, or local) other than 
     those individuals specified in subsection (c). To the extent 
     possible, individuals appointed to the Working Group shall 
     have used the health care system within the previous 2 years 
     and shall not be paid employees or representatives of 
     associations or advocacy organizations involved in the health 
     care system.
       (e) Appointment Criteria.--
       (1) House of representatives.--The Speaker and Minority 
     Leader of the House of Representatives shall make the 
     appointments described in subsection (b) in consultation with 
     the chairperson and ranking member of the following 
     committees of the House of Representatives:
       (A) The Committee on Ways and Means.
       (B) The Committee on Energy and Commerce.
       (C) The Committee on Education and the Workforce.
       (2) Senate.--The Majority Leader and Minority Leader of the 
     Senate shall make the appointments described in subsection 
     (b) in consultation with the chairperson and ranking member 
     of the following committees of the Senate:
       (A) The Committee on Finance.
       (B) The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
     Pensions.
       (f) Period of Appointment.--Members of the Working Group 
     shall be appointed for a term of 2 years. Such term is 
     renewable and any vacancies shall not affect the power and 
     duties of the Working Group but shall be filled in the same 
     manner as the original appointment.
       (g) Appointment of the Chairperson.--Not later than 15 days 
     after the date on which all members of the Working Group have 
     been appointed under subsection (b), the leadership shall 
     make a joint designation of the chairperson of the Working 
     Group. If the leadership fails to make such designation 
     within such time period, the Working Group Members shall, not 
     later than 10 days after the end of such time period, 
     designate a chairperson by majority vote.
       (h) Subcommittees.--The Working Group may establish 
     subcommittees if doing so increases the efficiency of the 
     Working Group in completing its tasks.
       (i) Duties.--
       (1) Hearings.--Not later than 90 days after the date of 
     appointment of the chairperson under subsection (g), the 
     Working Group shall hold hearings to examine--
       (A) the capacity of the public and private health care 
     systems to expand coverage options;

[[Page S10044]]

       (B) the cost of health care and the effectiveness of care 
     provided at all stages of disease, but in particular the cost 
     of services at the end of life;
       (C) innovative State strategies used to expand health care 
     coverage and lower health care costs;
       (D) local community solutions to accessing health care 
     coverage;
       (E) efforts to enroll individuals currently eligible for 
     public or private health care coverage;
       (F) the role of evidence-based medical practices that can 
     be documented as restoring, maintaining, or improving a 
     patient's health, and the use of technology in supporting 
     providers in improving quality of care and lowering costs; 
     and
       (G) strategies to assist purchasers of health care, 
     including consumers, to become more aware of the impact of 
     costs, and to lower the costs of health care.
       (2) Additional hearings.--The Working Group may hold 
     additional hearings on subjects other than those listed in 
     paragraph (1) so long as such hearings are determined to be 
     necessary by the Working Group in carrying out the purposes 
     of this Act. Such additional hearings do not have to be 
     completed within the time period specified in paragraph (1) 
     but shall not delay the other activities of the Working Group 
     under this section.
       (3) The health report to the american people.--Not later 
     than 90 days after the hearings described in paragraphs (1) 
     and (2) are completed, the Working Group shall prepare and 
     make available to health care consumers through the Internet 
     and other appropriate public channels, a report to be 
     entitled, ``The Health Report to the American People''. Such 
     report shall be understandable to the general public and 
     include--
       (A) a summary of--
       (i) health care and related services that may be used by 
     individuals throughout their life span;
       (ii) the cost of health care services and their medical 
     effectiveness in providing better quality of care for 
     different age groups;
       (iii) the source of coverage and payment, including 
     reimbursement, for health care services;
       (iv) the reasons people are uninsured or underinsured and 
     the cost to taxpayers, purchasers of health services, and 
     communities when Americans are uninsured or underinsured;
       (v) the impact on health care outcomes and costs when 
     individuals are treated in later stages of disease;
       (vi) health care cost containment strategies; and
       (vii) information on health care needs that need to be 
     addressed;
       (B) examples of community strategies to provide health care 
     coverage or access;
       (C) information on geographic-specific issues relating to 
     health care;
       (D) information concerning the cost of care in different 
     settings, including institutional-based care and home and 
     community-based care;
       (E) a summary of ways to finance health care coverage; and
       (F) the role of technology in providing future health care 
     including ways to support the information needs of patients 
     and providers.
       (4) Community meetings.--
       (A) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Working Group shall initiate 
     health care community meetings throughout the United States 
     (in this section referred to as ``community meetings''). Such 
     community meetings may be geographically or regionally based 
     and shall be completed within 180 days after the initiation 
     of the first meeting.
       (B) Number of meetings.--The Working Group shall hold a 
     sufficient number of community meetings in order to receive 
     information that reflects--
       (i) the geographic differences throughout the United 
     States;
       (ii) diverse populations; and
       (iii) a balance among urban and rural populations.
       (C) Meeting requirements.--
       (i) Facilitator.--A State health officer may be the 
     facilitator at the community meetings.
       (ii) Attendance.--At least 1 member of the Working Group 
     shall attend and serve as chair of each community meeting. 
     Other members may participate through interactive technology.
       (iii) Topics.--The community meetings shall, at a minimum, 
     address the following issues:

       (I) The optimum way to balance costs and benefits so that 
     affordable health coverage is available to as many people as 
     possible.
       (II) The identification of services that provide cost-
     effective, essential health care services to maintain and 
     improve health and which should be included in health care 
     coverage.
       (III) The cost of providing increased benefits.
       (IV) The mechanisms to finance health care coverage, 
     including defining the appropriate financial role for 
     individuals, businesses, and government.

       (iv) Interactive technology.--The Working Group may 
     encourage public participation in community meetings through 
     interactive technology and other means as determined 
     appropriate by the Working Group.
       (D) Interim requirements.--Not later than 180 days after 
     the date of completion of the community meetings, the Working 
     Group shall prepare and make available to the public through 
     the Internet and other appropriate public channels, an 
     interim set of recommendations on health care coverage and 
     ways to improve and strengthen the health care system based 
     on the information and preferences expressed at the community 
     meetings. There shall be a 90-day public comment period on 
     such recommendations.
       (j) Recommendations.--Not later than 120 days after the 
     expiration of the public comment period described in 
     subsection (h)(3)(D), the Working Group shall submit to 
     Congress and the President a final set of recommendations, 
     including any proposed legislative language to implement such 
     recommendations.
       (k) Administration.--
       (1) Executive director.--There shall be an Executive 
     Director of the Working Group who shall be appointed by the 
     chairperson of the Working Group in consultation with the 
     members of the Working Group.
       (2) Compensation.--While serving on the business of the 
     Working Group (including travel time), a member of the 
     Working Group shall be entitled to compensation at the per 
     diem equivalent of the rate provided for level IV of the 
     Executive Schedule under section 5315 of title 5, United 
     States Code, and while so serving away from home and the 
     member's regular place of business, a member may be allowed 
     travel expenses, as authorized by the chairperson of the 
     Working Group. For purposes of pay and employment benefits, 
     rights, and privileges, all personnel of the Working Group 
     shall be treated as if they were employees of the Senate.
       (3) Information from federal agencies.--The Working Group 
     may secure directly from any Federal department or agency 
     such information as the Working Group considers necessary to 
     carry out this Act. Upon request of the Working Group, the 
     head of such department or agency shall furnish such 
     information.
       (4) Postal services.--The Working Group may use the United 
     States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions 
     as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
       (l) Detail.--Not more than 10 Federal Government employees 
     employed by the Department of Labor and 10 Federal Government 
     employees employed by the Department of Health and Human 
     Services may be detailed to the Working Group under this 
     section without further reimbursement. Any detail of an 
     employee shall be without interruption or loss of civil 
     service status or privilege.
       (m) Temporary and Intermittent Services.--The chairperson 
     of the Working Group may procure temporary and intermittent 
     services under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States 
     Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily 
     equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for 
     level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such 
     title.
       (n) Annual Report.--Not later that 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, and annually thereafter during the 
     existence of the Working Group, the Working Group shall 
     report to Congress and make public a detailed description of 
     the expenditures of the Working Group used to carry out its 
     duties under this section.
       (o) Sunset of Working Group.--The Working Group shall 
     terminate when the report described in subsection (j) is 
     submitted to Congress.

     SEC. 5. CONGRESSIONAL ACTION.

       (a) Drafting.--If the Working Group does not provide 
     legislative language in the report under section 4(j) then 
     the committees described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 
     4(e) may draft legislative language based on the 
     recommendations of the Working Group.
       (b) Bill Introduction.--
       (1) In general.--Any legislative language described in 
     subsection (a) may be introduced as a bill by request in the 
     following manner:
       (A) House of representatives.--In the House of 
     Representatives, by the Majority Leader and the Minority 
     Leader not later than 10 days after receipt of the 
     legislative language.
       (B) Senate.--In the Senate, by the Majority Leader and the 
     Minority Leader not later than 10 days after receipt of the 
     legislative language.
       (2) Alternative by administration.--The President may 
     submit legislative language based on the recommendations of 
     the Working Group and such legislative language may be 
     introduced in the manner described in paragraph (1).
       (c) Committee Consideration.--
       (1) In general.--Any legislative language submitted 
     pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b) (in this 
     section referred to as ``implementing legislation'') shall be 
     referred to the appropriate committees of the House of 
     Representatives and the Senate.
       (2) Reporting.--
       (A) Committee action.--If, not later than 150 days after 
     the date on which the implementing legislation is referred to 
     a committee under paragraph (1), the committee has reported 
     the implementing legislation or has reported an original bill 
     whose subject is related to reforming the health care system, 
     or to providing access to affordable health care coverage for 
     Americans, the regular rules of the applicable House of 
     Congress shall apply to such legislation.
       (B) Discharge from committees
       (i) Senate.--

       (I) In general.--If the implementing legislation or an 
     original bill described in subparagraph (A) has not been 
     reported by a

[[Page S10045]]

     committee of the Senate within 180 days after the date on 
     which such legislation was referred to committee under 
     paragraph (1), it shall be in order for any Senator to move 
     to discharge the committee from further consideration of such 
     implementing legislation.
       (II) Sequential referrals.--Should a sequential referral of 
     the implementing legislation be made, the additional 
     committee has 30 days for consideration of implementing 
     legislation before the discharge motion described in 
     subclause (I) would be in order.
       (III) Procedure.--The motion described in subclause (I) 
     shall not be in order after the implementing legislation has 
     been placed on the calendar. While the motion described in 
     subclause (I) is pending, no other motions related to the 
     motion described in subclause (I) shall be in order. Debate 
     on a motion to discharge shall be limited to not more than 10 
     hours, equally divided and controlled by the majority leader 
     and the minority leader, or their designees. An amendment to 
     the motion shall not be in order, nor shall it be in order to 
     move to reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed or 
     disagreed to.
       (IV) Exception.--If implementing language is submitted on a 
     date later than May 1 of the second session of a Congress, 
     the committee shall have 90 days to consider the implementing 
     legislation before a motion to discharge under this clause 
     would be in order.

       (ii) House of representatives.--If the implementing 
     legislation or an original bill described in subparagraph (A) 
     has not been reported out of a committee of the House of 
     Representatives within 180 days after the date on which such 
     legislation was referred to committee under paragraph (1), 
     then on any day on which the call of the calendar for motions 
     to discharge committees is in order, any member of the House 
     of Representatives may move that the committee be discharged 
     from consideration of the implementing legislation, and this 
     motion shall be considered under the same terms and 
     conditions, and if adopted the House of Representatives shall 
     follow the procedure described in subsection (d)(1).
       (d) Floor Consideration.--
       (1) Motion to proceed.--If a motion to discharge made 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(2)(B)(i) or (c)(2)(B)(ii) is 
     adopted, then, not earlier than 5 legislative days after the 
     date on which the motion to discharge is adopted, a motion 
     may be made to proceed to the bill.
       (2) Failure of motion.--If the motion to discharge made 
     pursuant to subsection (c)(2)(B)(i) or (c)(2)(B)(ii) fails, 
     such motion may be made not more than 2 additional times, but 
     in no case more frequently than within 30 days of the 
     previous motion. Debate on each of such motions shall be 
     limited to 5 hours, equally divided.
       (3) Applicable rules.--Once the Senate is debating the 
     implementing legislation the regular rules of the Senate 
     shall apply.

     SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act, other than section 4(i)(3), $3,000,000 
     for each of fiscal years 2003, 2004, 2005.
       (b) Health Report to the American People.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated for the preparation and 
     dissemination of the Health Report to the American People 
     described in section 4(i)(3), such sums as may be necessary 
     for the fiscal year in which the report is required to be 
     submitted.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I thank my colleague for his kind remarks, 
especially his kind remarks with regard to me. I share a mutual 
affection for him because, as a leader in the House on health care, he 
did so many good things. We are so happy to have him in the Senate 
where he has continued his work on health care. I am very grateful to 
him.
  Mr. President, I rise to associate myself with the remarks of my good 
friend and colleague, the Senator from Oregon, Mr. Wyden.
  Last week, we were all dismayed to learn the Census Bureau figures 
indicate the number of uninsured in our country has risen from 39.8 
million in 2000 to 41.2 million in 2001.
  Of even greater concern is the fact that most of the newly uninsured 
previously had employer-based coverage.
  Obviously, this is a trend in the wrong direction despite years of 
efforts here in Washington to improve our country's health care 
delivery system.
  Clearly, we must take another approach.
  In a nutshell, the legislation that Senator Wyden and I are 
introducing today will stimulate fruitful discussion and debate on how 
we can really effect improvements to our nation's health care system--
improvements that can be accepted at all levels, from communities on up 
to the Federal government.
  We have worked on this bill for several months and are proud to have 
reached bipartisan consensus.
  Bipartisanship, it seems, is a rare occurrence these days. But, in 
our opinion, the only way to resolve our country's health crisis is to 
put politics aside and work together toward common goals.
  The Health Care That Works for All Americans Act of 2002 reflects our 
common goals on how to resolve this country's health care woes.
  We accomplish these important goals by fostering candid discussions--
in every corner of our country--through which the public can have an 
earnest discussion about our current health care system.
  These discussions will lead to recommendations on how to improve 
health care coverage which will help guide the Congress as it moves 
forward in this area.
  It is our hope that, in the end, this legislation will provide 
Americans with the proper tools to access high quality, affordable 
health care coverage.
  Basically, our legislation envisions three steps: public meetings; 
recommendations to Congress; and congressional action.
  We see this an as interactive process, which will help all of us be 
more informed consumers and which can produce real changes for the 
public.
  At this point, I would like to take this opportunity to discuss each 
of these steps in more detail.
  The first step of this bill is to stimulate community gatherings at 
which individuals from all walks of life can provide their viewpoints 
on which health benefits they believe should be covered.
  Obviously, a necessary component of that discussion will be how the 
benefits can be paid for, and by whom. Strange as it may seem, our 
government has never actually asked the American people what they want 
from our health care system. These community meetings would pose 
questions to individuals such as, ``What type of health coverage do you 
want how much are you willing to pay?''
  In addition, debate would focus on the financial responsibilities of 
the government, businesses, and individual citizens.
  I believe these issues must be discussed at the beginning of a new 
debate on health coverage, because the public's response is essential 
to building a nationwide consensus for creating a new health care 
system. It is critical to receive feedback from those who use the 
health care system on a daily, weekly or even annual basis.
  Our plan is to hear from everyone who has had first-hand experience 
with the health care system. We want to hear what people like and 
dislike about the current system and their proposals for change. And, 
we also hope to hear from those who do not use health services and the 
reasons why they have not sought health care coverage.

  We hope to stimulate a provocative discussion based on key questions. 
Is health care too expensive? Too complicated? Or is it just not 
available to certain segments of our society?
  The Wyden-Hatch legislation creates a Citizens' Health Care Working 
Group which would be charged with posing these tough questions and 
overseeing this crucial debate on how to improve upon our current 
health care system.
  The Citizens' Health Care Working Group will be comprised of 
individuals who have a deep interest in health care: patients; 
providers, community leaders; and key state and federal officials.
  The Working Group will coordinate nationwide community meetings and 
facilitate the public in expressing their views on the complex and 
often difficult choices concerning health care coverage.
  To achieve this objective, our bill directs the Working Group to 
produce a ``Health Care Report to the American People.'' This report 
will be used as a guidebook designed to describe the cost and 
availability of health choices available to Americans across the 
country--taking into account geographic differences.
  Since this issue has been visited over and over again without 
noticeable results, we believe that it is time to have an honest 
dialogue about sensitive health care issues with the public so that 
individual citizens will have a better idea of what choices members of 
Congress and key health officials are facing when health care issues 
are being debated.
  We envision asking citizens about a whole range of services and 
procedures, a ``bottom-up'' review of the health

[[Page S10046]]

care system, if you will. We hope these community discussions will look 
at current coverage issues, such as whether Medicaid should provide 
better coverage for transplants, recognizing that these are very 
expensive, labor-intensive procedures that may use scarce resources 
that might have been used elsewhere.
  Another area we hope might be explored is how to improve coverage of 
long-term care services, and how this should be paid.
  These choices--economic, moral, legal and social--will be difficult 
ones, but the purpose of our legislation is this--to start discussing 
these vital issues with those on whom there will be the greatest 
impact--the American people. We cannot afford to put off these 
discussions any longer.
  In the past, health reform debates have not included the voice of the 
people who actually need to live with these decisions. The Wyden-Hatch 
legislation will ensure that those Americans who depend on quality, 
affordable health care are at the forefront of the discussion before 
the special interests weigh in with their objectives.
  Mr. President, I ask my colleagues, given the failures of the past, 
isn't it time that we approach this problem by listening to citizens' 
viewpoints on health care coverage?
  The second step of this legislation is to direct the Working Group to 
take the ideas offered by the public and translate these comments into 
recommendations for our elected officials, specifically Members of 
Congress and the President.
  The Working Group will have substantial awareness of our citizens' 
preferences because of their involvement in the public meetings across 
the country. After the meetings are completed, the Working Group will 
highlight the issues raised by the public and provide them to members 
of Congress and the President for evaluation.

  The third step of this legislation involves drafting these 
recommendations into legislation which will eventually be voted upon by 
both the House and the Senate.
  Never before has Congress voted on a health care proposal built on a 
foundation created by the public making difficult heath care choices.
  If enacted, the Wyden-Hatch bill will provide for just such a vote.
  Senator Wyden and I both know there will be many questions about this 
proposal, but, in my opinion, the most important question is ``Why 
now?''
  The answer is simple--the American people cannot afford to wait any 
longer. The number of uninsured Americans, which had been declining for 
the past couple of years, is now increasing.
  In addition, the costs of gridlock are simply too great--on human, 
social, economic and moral grounds. Congress is on the verge of 
completing another session without significant progress on major health 
care reforms.
  Once again, we have not passed prescription drug coverage for 
Medicare beneficiaries. Once again, we have not addressed the issue of 
the uninsured. Once again, we have not approved legislation that 
includes patient protections.
  And the reason for this inaction is partisan politics--no one is 
willing to compromise so we end up doing nothing and the American 
public suffers. In my opinion, something must be done to address these 
important issues, sooner rather than later.
  One issue that must be addressed is the overwhelming cost of health 
care. Every time I go home to Utah, I hear complaints from my 
constituents about escalating health care premiums and the price of 
prescription drugs. People are having a difficult time paying for their 
health insurance premiums, their physicians' visits and their 
medicines. We were all disturbed last year to hear about a recent 
Towers Perrin survey indicating that the cost of health benefit plans 
at large companies is expected to rise an average of 15 percent--15 
percent!--in 2003.
  Some businesses, especially smaller employers, are worried that they 
will no longer be able to provide health insurance coverage to their 
employees. Utah physicians complain to me about the inadequate Medicare 
reimbursement rates and are threatening to leave the state.
  In fact, many of the federal health programs have complicated and 
over-bearing regulations that are confusing to participating providers. 
For example, is it necessary to have a book of Medicaid regulations 
thicker than the Black's Law Dictionary?
  While our health care system provides the highest quality services in 
the world and is the most technologically advanced, America's health 
system has fundamental flaws. The purpose of this legislation is to 
build on the positive components of our current system and improve the 
flaws.
  We believe that the best way to improve the current system is to 
listen to public input and implement their ideas and suggestions.
  We must get past playing the blame game. All of the powerful special 
interests are going to have to accept some reforms they have rejected 
in the past if America is to have a health care system that works for 
all.
  I believe this is what we will hear from the American people if they 
are given the chance to drive the debate on health reform as envisioned 
by this legislation. Unfortunately, there never has been a system to 
gather that public input until now.
  Mr. President, I am proud to be the lead Republican sponsor of the 
Health Care that Works for All Americans Act of 2002. I urge my 
colleagues to work with us so this legislation will be enacted into law 
in a timely manner. The American people cannot afford to wait any 
longer.
  I praise my colleague again for his leadership in so many areas, but 
especially the area of health care. He is sincere. He is dedicated. He 
is smart. He works hard on these issues. I am proud to work with him on 
this issue, and hope we can be successful in passing this bill and 
getting this very worthwhile effort started.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NELSON of Florida:
  S. 3064. A bill to prohibit the use of patient databases for 
marketing without the express consent of the patient; to the Committee 
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, privacy concerns continues to 
grow not only in Florida, but throughout the Nation. This past August, 
the Administration finalized rules which will allow pharmacies and 
other health care entities to profit from their confidential patient 
databases by entering marketing agreements with giant health 
corporations.
  Under the new rules, a pharmacy can search its database for patients 
using a specific prescription drug and then turn around and send an 
unsolicited advertisement on behalf of a drug maker peddling a more 
expensive alternative drug, even if it's less effective. And to make 
matters worse, the consumer can't ask the company to stop.
  Instead of banning this anti-consumer practice, the Administration 
issued non-binding guidelines asking third parties not to provide 
financial incentives to doctors or pharmacies in exchange for 
suggesting certain drugs to patients. While the guidelines are well 
meaning, this terrible practice won't stop if the government doesn't do 
more than offer suggestions. We need to pass a law to prohibit this 
behavior.
  Today, I'm introducing a bill that allows consumers to decide if they 
want to receive health advertisements generated as a result of their 
personal health characteristics. Under my legislation, pharmacies, 
insurance companies and other health entities would be prohibited from 
using private, personally identifiable health information to provide 
marketing services to any entity without providing notice to the 
consumer about its disclosure practices and obtaining the consumer's 
express written consent.
  The legislation makes an exception for treatment communications 
unless the covered entity receives direct or indirect remuneration from 
a third party for making the communication. The free flow of 
information is important when sought by the consumer, but treatment 
communications tarnished by the marketing dollars of third parties 
create an inherent conflict of interest by encouraging patients, who 
don't know their pharmacist has been paid, to purchase high-cost 
alternative drugs that are not necessarily more effective than those 
prescribed by their doctor. Unnecessary spending driven by this 
practice, not only hurts individual consumers, but also the American 
taxpayer as Medicare and Medicaid costs skyrocket.

[[Page S10047]]

  My goal is to restore control to the consumer, so that they can make 
a decision to receive, or not receive, these advertisements once they 
have been informed that their personal information will be used for 
that purpose and once they understand that the covered entity is being 
paid to make a particular recommendation.
  I look forward to working with all interested parties to resolve this 
problem in a timely manner for consumers and 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. 3064

       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 ``Health Records 
     Confidentiality Act of 2002''.

      SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Individually identifiable health information.--The term 
     ``individually identifiable health information'' means 
     information that is a subset of health information, including 
     demographic information collected from an individual, that--
       (A) is created or received from a health care provider, 
     health plan, employer, or health care clearinghouse;
       (B) relates to the past, present, or future physical or 
     mental health or condition of an individual, the provision of 
     health care to an individual, or the past, present or future 
     payment for the provision of health care to an individual; 
     and
       (C)(i) identifies the individual; or
       (ii) with respect to which there is a reasonable basis to 
     believe that the information can be used to identify the 
     individual.
       (2) Marketing.--The term ``marketing'' means to make a 
     communication about a product or service to encourage 
     recipients of the communication to purchase or use the 
     product or service, but does not include communications made 
     as part of the treatment of a patient for the purpose of 
     furthering treatment unless the covered entity receives 
     direct or indirect remuneration from a third party for making 
     the communication.

     SEC. 3. PROTECTION OF PRIVATE HEALTH INFORMATION.

       Except in accordance with section 4, a health care 
     provider, pharmacy, health researcher, health plan, health 
     oversight agency, public health authority, employer, health 
     or life insurer, or school or university shall not--
       (1) disclose individually identifiable health information 
     to an entity for marketing the products or services of such 
     entity; or
       (2) use individually identifiable health information in its 
     possession to provide marketing services to any entity.

     SEC. 4. NOTICE AND CONSENT REQUIREMENTS.

       A health care provider, pharmacy, health researcher, health 
     plan, health oversight agency, public health authority, 
     employer, health or life insurer, or school or university may 
     provide marketing services to a pharmaceutical company if 
     such health care entity--
       (1) provides clear and conspicuous notice to the individual 
     involved concerning its disclosure practices for all 
     individually identifiable health information collected or 
     created with regard to the individual; and
       (2) obtains the consent of the individual involved to use 
     the information and that consent is manifested by an 
     affirmative act in a written communication which only 
     references and applies to the specific marketing purpose for 
     which the information is to be used.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INOUYE:
  S. 3066. A bill to improve programs relating to Indian tribes; to the 
Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill and a section-by-section analysis be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill and additional material was 
ordered to be printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3066

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Indian 
     Technical Corrections Act''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definition of Secretary.

         TITLE I--PROGRAMS RELATING TO PARTICULAR INDIAN TRIBES

Sec. 101. Leases of restricted land.
Sec. 102. Lease of tribally-owned land by Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes 
              of the Fort Peck Reservation.
Sec. 103. Navajo-Hopi relocation impact study.
Sec. 104. Indian health demonstration project.
Sec. 105. Fetal alcohol syndrome and fetal alcohol effect grants.
Sec. 106. Illegal narcotics traffic on the Tohono O'Odham and St. Regis 
              Reservations.
Sec. 107. Rehabilitation of Celilo Indian Village.
Sec. 108. Rural health care facility, Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, 
              North Dakota.
Sec. 109. Health care funding allocation, Eagle Butte Service Unit.
Sec. 110. Oklahoma Native American Cultural Center and Museum.
Sec. 111. Certification of rental proceeds.
Sec. 112. Waiver of repayment of expert assistance loans to the Oglala 
              Sioux Tribe.
Sec. 113. Waiver of repayment of expert assistance loans to the 
              Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma.
Sec. 114. Facilitation of construction of pipeline to provide water for 
              emergency fire suppression and other purposes.
Sec. 115. Conveyance of Native Alaskan objects.
Sec. 116. Shakopee fee land.
Sec. 117. Agreement with Dry Prairie Rural Water Association, 
              Incorporated.

 TITLE II--COLLABORATION BETWEEN TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS AND FOREST SERVICE

Sec. 201. Short title.
Sec. 202. Findings.
Sec. 203. Forest legacy program.
Sec. 204. Forestry and resource management assistance to Indian tribes.

     TITLE III--PUEBLO OF SANTA CLARA AND SAN ILDEFONSO, NEW MEXICO

Sec. 301. Definitions.
Sec. 302. Trust for the Pueblo of Santa Clara, New Mexico.
Sec. 303. Trust for the Pueblo of San Ildefonso, New Mexico.
Sec. 304. Survey and legal descriptions.
Sec. 305. Administration of trust land.
Sec. 306. Effect.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF SECRETARY.

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

              TITLE I--PROGRAMS RELATING TO INDIAN TRIBES

     SEC. 101. LEASES OF RESTRICTED LAND.

       Subsection (a) of the first section of the Act of August 9, 
     1955 (25 U.S.C. 415(a)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following: ``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no 
     approval by the Secretary shall be required for any new 
     lease, or for renewal of any existing lease, of land under 
     this subsection if the lease, including all periods covered 
     by any renewal, is for an aggregate term of less than 7 
     years.''.

     SEC. 102. LEASE OF TRIBALLY-OWNED LAND BY ASSINIBOINE AND 
                   SIOUX TRIBES OF THE FORT PECK RESERVATION.

       The first section of the Act of August 9, 1955 (25 U.S.C. 
     415) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Lease of Tribally-Owned Land by Assiniboine and Sioux 
     Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding subsection (a) and any 
     regulations under part 162 of title 25, Code of Federal 
     Regulations, subject to paragraph (2), the Assiniboine and 
     Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation may lease to the 
     Northern Border Pipeline Company tribally-owned land on the 
     Fort Peck Indian Reservation for 1 or more interstate gas 
     pipelines.
       ``(2) Conditions.--A lease entered into under paragraph 
     (1)--
       ``(A) shall commence during fiscal year 2011 for an initial 
     term of 25 years;
       ``(B) may be renewed for an additional term of 25 years; 
     and
       ``(C) shall specify in the terms of the lease an annual 
     rental rate--
       ``(i) which rate shall be increased by 3 percent for each 
     5-year period; and
       ``(ii) the adjustment of which in accordance with clause 
     (i) shall be considered to satisfy any review requirement 
     under part 162 of title 25, Code of Federal Regulations.''.

     SEC. 103. NAVAJO-HOPI RELOCATION IMPACT STUDY.

       (a) In General.--Section 34 of Public Law 93-531 (commonly 
     known as the ``Navajo-Hopi Land Settlement Act of 1974'') (25 
     U.S.C. 640d et seq.) (as added by section 203 of the Indian 
     Programs Reauthorization and Technical Amendments Act of 
     2002) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 34. NAVAJO-HOPI RELOCATION IMPACT STUDY.

       ``(a) In General.--Not later than 120 days after the date 
     of enactment of this section, the Office of Navajo and Hopi 
     Indian Relocation shall enter into a contract with an 
     independent contractor under which the independent contractor 
     shall complete, not later than 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of this section, a study to determine whether--
       ``(1) the purposes of this Act have been achieved; and
       ``(2) recommended activities should be carried out to 
     mitigate the consequences of the implementation of this Act.
       ``(b) Scope.--The study conducted under subsection (a) 
     shall include an analysis of--
       ``(1) the long-term effects of the relocation programs 
     under this Act on the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo Nation;
       ``(2) the ongoing needs of the Hopi and Navajo populations 
     relocated under this Act;
       ``(3) the ongoing needs of the other communities affected 
     by relocations under this Act (including communities affected 
     by section 10(f) and communities on Hopi partitioned land and 
     Navajo partitioned land);

[[Page S10048]]

       ``(4) the effects of termination of the relocation programs 
     under this Act, including the effects of--
       ``(A) closure of the Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian 
     Relocation; and
       ``(B) transfer of responsibilities of that Office to other 
     Federal agencies, the Hopi Tribe, and the Navajo Nation in 
     accordance with applicable provisions of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450 et 
     seq.); and
       ``(5) other appropriate factors, as determined by the 
     Office of Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation.
       ``(c) Restriction on Study.--The study conducted under 
     subsection (a) shall neither address, nor make any 
     recommendations relating to, the relocation requirements for 
     Navajos and Hopis under this Act, including any proposals for 
     the return of Navajos or Hopis.
       ``(d) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section, the Office of Navajo and Hopi 
     Relocation shall submit to Congress, the Hopi Tribe, and the 
     Navajo Nation a report that describes the results of the 
     study conducted under subsection (a).
       ``(e) Funding.--Of amounts made available to the Office of 
     Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation, not more than $1,000,000 
     shall be made available to carry out this section.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     takes effect on the later of--
       (1) the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (2) the date of enactment of the Indian Programs 
     Reauthorization and Technical Amendments Act of 2002.

     SEC. 104. INDIAN HEALTH DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.

       Section 10 of the Ponca Restoration Act (25 U.S.C. 983h) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Demonstration Project.--The Director of the Indian 
     Health Service shall direct the Aberdeen Area Office of the 
     Indian Health Service to carry out, in coordination with the 
     Tribe, a demonstration project to determine--
       ``(1) the ability of an urban, restored facility of the 
     Tribe to provide health services to members residing in 
     Douglas County and Sarpy County, Nebraska, and Pottawattamie 
     County, Iowa;
       ``(2) the viability of using third-party billing to enable 
     a facility described in paragraph (1) to become self-
     sustaining; and
       ``(3) the effectiveness of using a computer-registered 
     patient management system in the counties specified in 
     paragraph (1).''.

     SEC. 105. FETAL ALCOHOL SYNDROME AND FETAL ALCOHOL EFFECT 
                   GRANTS.

       Section 708(f)(2) of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 1665g(f)(2)) (as amended by section 103(g)(1)(C) 
     of the Indian Programs Reauthorization and Technical 
     Amendments Act of 2002) is amended by inserting before the 
     period at the end the following: ``(including to carry out 
     demonstration projects that involve 1 or more Indian tribes, 
     tribal organizations, or urban Indian organizations working 
     with organizations such as the National Organization on Fetal 
     Alcohol Syndrome to carry out subparagraphs (A) and (F) of 
     subsection (a)(2))''.

     SEC. 106. ILLEGAL NARCOTICS TRAFFIC ON THE TOHONO O'ODHAM AND 
                   ST. REGIS RESERVATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 4216(a)(3) of the Indian Alcohol 
     and Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act of 1986 (25 
     U.S.C. 2442(a)(3)) (as amended by section 104(e)(1) of the 
     Indian Programs Reauthorization and Technical Amendments Act 
     of 2002) is amended by striking paragraph (3) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated--
       ``(A) to carry out paragraph (1)(A), $1,000,000 for each of 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2006; and
       ``(B) to carry out provisions of this subsection other than 
     paragraph (1)(A), such sums as are necessary for each of 
     fiscal years 2002 through 2006.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     takes effect on the later of--
       (1) the date of enactment of this Act; or
       (2) the date of enactment of the Indian Programs 
     Reauthorization and Technical Amendments Act of 2002.

     SEC. 107. REHABILITATION OF CELILO INDIAN VILLAGE.

       Section 401(b)(3) of Public Law 100-581 (102 Stat. 2944) is 
     amended by inserting ``Celilo Village and other'' before 
     ``existing sites''.

     SEC. 108. RURAL HEALTH CARE FACILITY, FORT BERTHOLD INDIAN 
                   RESERVATION, NORTH DAKOTA.

       The Three Affiliated Tribes and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe 
     Equitable Compensation Act is amended--
       (1) in section 3504 (106 Stat. 4732), by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to 
     carry out this section.''; and
       (2) by striking section 3511 (106 Stat. 4739) and inserting 
     the following:

     ``SEC. 3511. RURAL HEALTH CARE FACILITY, FORT BERTHOLD INDIAN 
                   RESERVATION, NORTH DAKOTA.

       ``There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services for the construction of a rural 
     health care facility on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation 
     of the Three Affiliated Tribes, North Dakota, $20,000,000.''.

     SEC. 109. HEALTH CARE FUNDING ALLOCATION, EAGLE BUTTE SERVICE 
                   UNIT.

       Section 117 of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act (25 
     U.S.C. 1616j) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(g) Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe Bonus Payment.--
       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, to promote more efficient use of the health care funding 
     allocation for fiscal year 2003, the Eagle Butte Service Unit 
     of the Indian Health Service, at the request of the Cheyenne 
     River Sioux Tribe, may carry out a program under which a 
     health professional may be paid--
       ``(A) a base salary in an amount up to the highest grade 
     and step available to a physician, pharmacist, or other 
     health professional, as the case may be; and
       ``(B) a recruitment or retention bonus of up to 25 percent 
     of the base salary rate of the health professional.
       ``(2) Monitoring and reporting.--If the Service implements 
     the program under paragraph (1), the Service shall--
       ``(A) monitor the program closely; and
       ``(B) not later than September 30, 2003, submit to the 
     Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate and the Committee 
     on Resources and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the 
     House of Representatives a report that includes an evaluation 
     of the program.''.

     SEC. 110. OKLAHOMA NATIVE AMERICAN CULTURAL CENTER AND 
                   MUSEUM.

       Section 1 of the Act entitled ``An Act to authorize the 
     construction of a Native American Cultural Center and Museum 
     in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma'' is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (c)(3) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(3) Director.--The term `Director' means the Director of 
     the Institute of Museum and Library Services.''; and
       (2) by striking ``Secretary'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``Director''.

     SEC. 111. CERTIFICATION OF RENTAL PROCEEDS.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any actual 
     rental proceeds from the lease of land acquired under section 
     1 of Public Law 91-229 (25 U.S.C. 488) certified by the 
     Secretary of the Interior shall be deemed--
       (1) to constitute the rental value of that land; and
       (2) to satisfy the requirement for appraisal of that land.

     SEC. 112. WAIVER OF REPAYMENT OF EXPERT ASSISTANCE LOANS TO 
                   THE OGLALA SIOUX TRIBE.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
       (1) the balances of all outstanding expert assistance loans 
     made to the Oglala Sioux Tribe under Public Law 88-168 (77 
     Stat. 301), and relating to Oglala Sioux Tribe v. United 
     States (Docket No. 117 of the United States Court of Federal 
     Claims), including all principal and interest, are canceled; 
     and
       (2) the Secretary of the Interior shall take such action as 
     is necessary to--
       (A) document the cancellation under paragraph (1); and
       (B) release the Oglala Sioux Tribe from any liability 
     associated with any loan described in paragraph (1).

     SEC. 113. WAIVER OF REPAYMENT OF EXPERT ASSISTANCE LOANS TO 
                   THE SEMINOLE TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA.

       Notwithstanding any other provision of law--
       (1) the balances of all outstanding expert assistance loans 
     made to the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma under Public Law 88-
     168 (77 Stat. 301), and relating to Seminole Tribe of 
     Oklahoma v. United States (Docket No. 247 of the United 
     States Court of Federal Claims), including all principal and 
     interest, are canceled; and
       (2) the Secretary of the Interior shall take such action as 
     is necessary to--
       (A) document the cancellation under paragraph (1); and
       (B) release the Seminole Tribe of Oklahoma from any 
     liability associated with any loan described in paragraph 
     (1).

     SEC. 114. FACILITATION OF CONSTRUCTION OF PIPELINE TO PROVIDE 
                   WATER FOR EMERGENCY FIRE SUPPRESSION AND OTHER 
                   PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, subject to valid existing rights under Federal and State 
     law, the land described in subsection (b), fee title to which 
     is held by the Barona Band of Mission Indians of California 
     (referred to in this section as the ``Band'')--
       (1) is declared to be held in trust by the United States 
     for the benefit of the Band; and
       (2) shall be considered to be a portion of the reservation 
     of the Band.
       (b) Land.--The land referred to in subsection (a) is land 
     comprising approximately 85 acres in San Diego County, 
     California, and described more particularly as follows: San 
     Bernardino Base and Meridian; T. 14 S., R. 1 E.; sec. 21: 
     W\1/2\SE\1/4\, 68 acres; NW\1/4\NW\1/4\, 17 acres.
       (c) Gaming.--The land taken into trust by subsection (a) 
     shall neither be considered to have been taken into trust for 
     gaming, nor be used for gaming (as that term is used in the 
     Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).

     SEC. 115. CONVEYANCE OF NATIVE ALASKAN OBJECTS.

       Notwithstanding any provision of law affecting the disposal 
     of Federal property, on the request of the Chugach Alaska 
     Corporation or Sealaska Corporation, the Secretary of 
     Agriculture shall convey to whichever of

[[Page S10049]]

     those corporations that has received title to a cemetery site 
     or historical place on National Forest System land conveyed 
     under section 14(h)(1) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement 
     Act (43 U.S.C. 1613(h)(1)) all artifacts, physical remains, 
     and copies of any available field records that--
       (1)(A) are in the possession of the Secretary of 
     Agriculture; and
       (B) have been collected from the cemetery site or 
     historical place; but
       (2) are not required to be conveyed in accordance with the 
     Native American Graves Protection Act and Repatriation Act 
     (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.) or any other applicable law.

     SEC. 116. SHAKOPEE FEE LAND.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     law, without further authorization by the United States, the 
     Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community in the State of 
     Minnesota (referred to in this section as the ``Community'') 
     may lease, sell, convey, warrant, or otherwise transfer all 
     or any part of the interest of the Community in or to any 
     real property that is not held in trust by the United States 
     for the benefit of the Community.
       (b) Trust Land not Affected.--Nothing in this section--
       (1) authorizes the Community to lease, sell, convey, 
     warrant, or otherwise transfer all or part of an interest in 
     any real property that is held in trust by the United States 
     for the benefit of the Community; or
       (2) affects the operation of any law governing leasing, 
     selling, conveying, warranting, or otherwise transferring any 
     interest in that trust land.

     SEC. 117. AGREEMENT WITH DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION, 
                   INCORPORATED.

       (a) In General.--Any agreement between the Tribe and Dry 
     Prairie Rural Water Association, Incorporated (or any non-
     Federal successor entity) for the use of water to meet the 
     needs of the Dry Prairie system that is entered into under 
     section 5 of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System Act 
     of 2000 (114 Stat. 1454)--
       (1) is approved by Congress; and
       (2) shall be approved and executed by the Secretary.

 TITLE II--COLLABORATION BETWEEN TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS AND FOREST SERVICE

     SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Tribal Governments and 
     Forest Service Collaboration Act of 2002''.

     SEC. 202. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) Indian tribes, members of Indian tribes, and Alaska 
     Natives hold 100,600,000 acres of land (56,600,000 acres in 
     the lower 48 States and 44,000,000 acres in Alaska), equaling 
     4.2 percent of the land area of the United States;
       (2) land held in trust for Indian tribes shares thousands 
     of miles of common boundary with National Forest System land;
       (3) Indian tribes have reserved rights and interests that 
     affect the management of hundreds of thousands of acres of 
     National Forest System land;
       (4) National Forest System land contains hundreds of 
     thousands of acres in which Indian tribes have cultural, 
     religious, and traditional interests, including interests 
     recognized in--
       (A) the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 
     Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.); and
       (B) the Act of August 11, 1978 (42 U.S.C. 1996 et seq.) 
     (commonly referred to as the ``American Indian Religious 
     Freedom Act'');
       (5) tribal land and National Forest System land share 
     natural resource attributes in many common ecosystems, 
     including biodiversity of plant and animal fauna, timber, 
     fish, wildlife, range, soils, recreation attributes, 
     airsheds, and watersheds;
       (6) effective ecosystem management--
       (A) integrates ecological principles and economic and 
     social factors; and
       (B) safeguards ecological sustainability, biodiversity, and 
     productivity;
       (7) Federal land management activities on National Forest 
     System land are affecting ecosystems that encompass National 
     Forest System land and tribal land;
       (8) collaborative planning and management between Indian 
     tribes and the Forest Service needs to be strengthened;
       (9) management practices on National Forest System land 
     can--
       (A) adversely affect tribal trust, cultural, religious, and 
     traditional resources on National Forest System land; and
       (B) place tribal land and resources at risk;
       (10) Indian tribal land managers and National Forest System 
     land managers have shared interests in maintaining the health 
     of the forests and in coordinating and sustaining the timber 
     supply from National Forest System land and tribal trust land 
     in order to jointly contribute to the economic stability of 
     local, timber-dependent communities;
       (11) cross-boundary management collaboration is needed to 
     address forest health emergencies that currently exist on 
     Federal and tribal forest land because of substantial areas 
     of dead and dying trees resulting from drought, insects, 
     fire, windstorm, or other causes;
       (12) tribal communities possess unique traditional 
     knowledge and technical expertise that can provide valuable 
     insight and guidance in the management of land and resources 
     contained within the National Forest System;
       (13) the Forest Service lacks comprehensive authorities to 
     work with tribal neighbors on collaborative or other issues;
       (14)(A) in recognition of that goal, in October 1999, the 
     Chief Operating Officer of the Forest Service commissioned a 
     National Tribal Relations Program Task Force to develop 
     recommendations to improve working relationships with Indian 
     tribes; and
       (B) the Task Force issued a final report in August 2000, 
     including administrative and legislative recommendations on 
     which this title is based;
       (15) Indian tribes and National Forests would benefit from 
     improved coordination and integration in application of 
     wildland fire resources, including Native American fire 
     crews; and
       (16) the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Research 
     Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 1600 et seq.) does not contain 
     specific authority for the Secretary to enter into 
     cooperative research and development agreements with tribal 
     governments.

     SEC. 203. FOREST LEGACY PROGRAM.

       (a) Participation by Indian Tribes.--Section 7 of the 
     Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2103c) 
     is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence of subsection (a), by inserting 
     ``, and Indian tribes,'' after ``government'';
       (2) in subsection (b), by inserting ``and programs of 
     Indian tribes'' after ``regional programs'';
       (3) in the second sentence of subsection (f), by striking 
     ``other appropriate State or regional natural resource 
     management agency'' and inserting ``other appropriate natural 
     resource management agency of a State, region, or Indian 
     tribe'';
       (4) in subsection (h)(2), by inserting ``or Indian tribe'' 
     before the period at the end; and
       (5) in the first sentence of subsection (j)(2), by 
     inserting ``Indian tribes,'' after ``governmental units,''.
       (b) Optional State and Tribal Grant Program.--
       ``(1) In general.--Section 7 of the Cooperative Forestry 
     Assistance Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2103c) is amended by 
     striking subsection (l) and inserting the following:
       ``(l) Optional State and Tribal Grants.--
       ``(1) Definition of indian tribe.--In this subsection, the 
     term `Indian tribe' has the meaning given the term in section 
     4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance 
     Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       ``(2) Grants.--At the request of a participating State or 
     participating Indian tribe, the Secretary shall provide a 
     grant to the State or Indian tribe to carry out the Forest 
     Legacy Program.
       ``(3) Administration.--If a State or Indian tribe elects to 
     receive a grant under this subsection--
       ``(A) the Secretary shall use a portion of the funds made 
     available under subsection (m), as determined by the 
     Secretary, to provide the grant to the State or Indian tribe; 
     and
       ``(B) the State or Indian tribe shall use the grant to 
     carry out the Forest Legacy Program.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--Section 7 of the Cooperative 
     Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2103c) is 
     amended--
       (A) in subsection (i), by striking ``subsection (b)'' and 
     inserting ``this section'';
       (B) in subsection (j)(1), by striking the first sentence 
     and inserting the following: ``Fair market value shall be 
     paid for any property interest acquired under this 
     section.''; and
       (C) in subsection (k)(2), by striking ``United States or 
     its'' and inserting ``United States, a State, Indian tribe, 
     or other entity, or their''.

     SEC. 204. FORESTRY AND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE TO 
                   INDIAN TRIBES.

       (a) Authority to Provide Assistance.--The Secretary of 
     Agriculture may provide financial, technical, educational, 
     and related assistance to an Indian tribe (as defined in 
     section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education 
     Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b)) for--
       (1) tribal consultation and coordination with the Forest 
     Service on issues relating to--
       (A) access by members of the Indian tribe to National 
     Forest System land for traditional, religious, and cultural 
     purposes;
       (B) coordinated or cooperative management of resources 
     shared by the Forest Service and the Indian tribe; and
       (C) provision of tribal traditional, cultural, or other 
     expertise or knowledge;
       (2) projects and activities for conservation education and 
     awareness with respect to forest land and grassland under the 
     jurisdiction of the Indian tribe; and
       (3) technical assistance for forest resources planning, 
     management, and conservation on land under the jurisdiction 
     of the Indian tribe.
       (b) Implementation.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall 
     promulgate regulations to implement subsection (a), including 
     rules for determining the distribution of assistance under 
     that subsection.
       (2) Consultation.--In carrying out paragraph (1), the 
     Secretary shall engage in full, open, and substantive 
     consultation with Indian tribes and representatives of Indian 
     tribes.
       (c) Coordination With the Secretary of the Interior.--The 
     Secretary of Agriculture shall coordinate with the Secretary 
     of the

[[Page S10050]]

     Interior during the establishment, implementation, and 
     administration of subsection (a) to ensure that programs 
     under that subsection--
       (1) do not conflict with tribal programs provided under the 
     authority of the Department of the Interior; and
       (2) meet the goals of the Indian tribes.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     this section.

     TITLE III--PUEBLO OF SANTA CLARA AND SAN ILDEFONSO, NEW MEXICO

     SEC. 301. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) Agreement.--The term ``Agreement'' means the agreement 
     entitled ``Agreement to Affirm Boundary Between Pueblo of 
     Santa Clara and Pueblo of San Ildefonso Aboriginal Lands 
     Within Garcia Canyon Tract'', entered into by the Governors 
     on December 20, 2000.
       (2) Boundary line.--The term ``boundary line'' means the 
     boundary line established under section 304(a).
       (3) Governors.--The term ``Governors'' means--
       (A) the Governor of the Pueblo of Santa Clara, New Mexico; 
     and
       (B) the Governor of the Pueblo of San Ildefonso, New 
     Mexico.
       (4) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the 
     meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
     Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
       (5) Pueblos.--The term ``Pueblos'' means--
       (A) the Pueblo of Santa Clara, New Mexico; and
       (B) the Pueblo of San Ildefonso, New Mexico.
       (6) Trust land.--The term ``trust land'' means the land 
     held by the United States in trust under section 302(a) or 
     303(a).

     SEC. 302. TRUST FOR THE PUEBLO OF SANTA CLARA, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) In General.--All right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to the land described in subsection (b), 
     including improvements on, appurtenances to, and mineral 
     rights (including rights to oil and gas) to the land, shall 
     be held by the United States in trust for the Pueblo of Santa 
     Clara, New Mexico.
       (b) Description of Land.--The land referred to in 
     subsection (a) consists of approximately 2,484 acres of 
     Bureau of Land Management land located in Rio Arriba County, 
     New Mexico, and more particularly described as--
       (1) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 22, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is located north of the boundary 
     line;
       (2) the southern half of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 23, New 
     Mexico Principal Meridian;
       (3) the southern half of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 24, New 
     Mexico Principal Meridian;
       (4) T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 25, excluding the 5-acre tract 
     in the southeast quarter owned by the Pueblo of San 
     Ildefonso;
       (5) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 26, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is located north and east of the 
     boundary line;
       (6) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 27, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is located north of the boundary 
     line;
       (7) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 8 E., sec. 19, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is not included in the Santa Clara 
     Pueblo Grant or the Santa Clara Indian Reservation; and
       (8) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 8 E., sec. 30, that is not 
     included in the Santa Clara Pueblo Grant or the San Ildefonso 
     Grant.

     SEC. 303. TRUST FOR THE PUEBLO OF SAN ILDEFONSO, NEW MEXICO.

       (a) In General.--All right, title, and interest of the 
     United States in and to the land described in subsection (b), 
     including improvements on, appurtenances to, and mineral 
     rights (including rights to oil and gas) to the land, shall 
     be held by the United States in trust for the Pueblo of San 
     Ildefonso, New Mexico.
       (b) Description of Land.--The land referred to in 
     subsection (a) consists of approximately 2,000 acres of 
     Bureau of Land Management land located in Rio Arriba County 
     and Santa Fe County in the State of New Mexico, and more 
     particularly described as--
       (1) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 22, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is located south of the boundary 
     line;
       (2) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 26, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is located south and west of the 
     boundary line;
       (3) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 27, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is located south of the boundary 
     line;
       (4) T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 34, New Mexico Principal 
     Meridian; and
       (5) the portion of T. 20 N., R. 7 E., sec. 35, New Mexico 
     Principal Meridian, that is not included in the San Ildefonso 
     Pueblo Grant.

     SEC. 304. SURVEY AND LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS.

       (a) Survey.--Not later than 180 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Office of Cadastral Survey of the 
     Bureau of Land Management shall, in accordance with the 
     Agreement, complete a survey of the boundary line established 
     under the Agreement for the purpose of establishing, in 
     accordance with sections 302(b) and 303(b), the boundaries of 
     the trust land.
       (b) Legal Descriptions.--
       (1) Publication.--On approval by the Governors of the 
     survey completed under subsection (a), the Secretary shall 
     publish in the Federal Register--
       (A) a legal description of the boundary line; and
       (B) legal descriptions of the trust land.
       (2) Technical corrections.--Before the date on which the 
     legal descriptions are published under paragraph (1)(B), the 
     Secretary may correct any technical errors in the 
     descriptions of the trust land provided in sections 302(b) 
     and 303(b) to ensure that the descriptions are consistent 
     with the terms of the Agreement.
       (3) Effect.--Beginning on the date on which the legal 
     descriptions are published under paragraph (1)(B), the legal 
     descriptions shall be the official legal descriptions of the 
     trust land.

     SEC. 305. ADMINISTRATION OF TRUST LAND.

       (a) In General.--Effective beginning on the date of 
     enactment of this Act--
       (1) the land held in trust under section 302(a) shall be 
     declared to be a part of the Santa Clara Indian Reservation; 
     and
       (2) the land held in trust under section 303(a) shall be 
     declared to be a part of the San Ildefonso Indian 
     Reservation.
       (b) Applicable Law.--
       (1) In general.--The trust land shall be administered in 
     accordance with any law (including regulations) or court 
     order generally applicable to property held in trust by the 
     United States for Indian tribes.
       (2) Pueblo lands act.--The following shall be subject to 
     section 17 of the Act of June 7, 1924 (commonly known as the 
     ``Pueblo Lands Act'') (25 U.S.C. 331 note):
       (A) The trust land.
       (B) Any land owned as of the date of enactment of this Act 
     or acquired after the date of enactment of this Act by the 
     Pueblo of Santa Clara in the Santa Clara Pueblo Grant.
       (C) Any land owned as of the date of enactment of this Act 
     or acquired after the date of enactment of this Act by the 
     Pueblo of San Ildefonso in the San Ildefonso Pueblo Grant.
       (c) Use of Trust Land.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to the criteria developed under 
     paragraph (2), the trust land may be used only for--
       (A) traditional and customary uses; or
       (B) stewardship conservation for the benefit of the Pueblo 
     for which the trust land is held in trust.
       (2) Criteria.--The Secretary shall work with the Pueblos to 
     develop appropriate criteria for using the trust land in a 
     manner that preserves the trust land for traditional and 
     customary uses or stewardship conservation.
       (3) Limitation.--Beginning on the date of enactment of this 
     Act, the trust land shall not be used for any new commercial 
     developments.

     SEC. 306. EFFECT.

       Nothing in this title--
       (1) affects any valid right-of-way, lease, permit, mining 
     claim, grazing permit, water right, or other right or 
     interest of a person or entity (other than the United States) 
     that is--
       (A) in or to the trust land; and
       (B) in existence before the date of enactment of this Act;
       (2) enlarges, impairs, or otherwise affects a right or 
     claim of the Pueblos to any land or interest in land that 
     is--
       (A) based on Aboriginal or Indian title; and
       (B) in existence before the date of enactment of this Act;
       (3) constitutes an express or implied reservation of water 
     or water right with respect to the trust land; or
       (4) affects any water right of the Pueblos in existence 
     before the date of enactment of this Act.
                                  ____


Section by Section Analysis of S. 3059--Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of 
    the Fort Peck Reservation Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 2002

       Section 1. Short Title. The Act may be cited as the 
     ``Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation 
     Judgment Fund Distribution Act of 2002.''
       Section 2. Findings and Purpose. Section 2 provides 
     congressional findings including that in 1987, the 
     Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation and 
     five individual Fort Peck tribal members filed a complaint in 
     the United States Claims Court in Assiniboine and Sioux 
     Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation v. the United States of 
     America, Docket No. 773-87-L to recover interest earned on 
     trust funds while those funds were held in special deposit 
     and IMPL-agency accounts; in this case, the Court held that 
     the United States was liable for any income derived from 
     investment of the trust funds of the Tribe and individual 
     members of the Tribe; the plaintiffs entered into a 
     settlement with the United States for payment of the claims; 
     the terms of the settlement were approved by the Court and 
     judgment in the amount of $4,522,551.81 was entered;
       Section 3. Definitions. Terms defined in this section 
     include ``Distribution Amount,'' ``Judgment Amount,'' 
     ``Principal Indebtedness,'' and ``Tribe.''
       Section 4. Distribution of Judgment Funds. Section 4 
     describes how the distribution amount awarded to the Tribe 
     shall be made available for tribal health, education, housing 
     and social services programs of the Tribe and the amount of 
     funds allocated among these uses shall be specified in an 
     annual budget developed by the Tribe and approved by the 
     Secretary of the Interior.
       Section 5. Applicable Law. Section 5 provides that all 
     funds distributed under this act, except those distributed 
     under Section 4 are subject to sections 7 and 8 of the Indian 
     Tribal Judgment Funds Use or Distribution Act.

[[Page S10051]]

       Section 6. Agreement with Dry Prairie Rural Water 
     Association, Incorporated. Section 6 provides that any 
     agreement between the Tribe and the Dry Prairie Rural Water 
     Association for the use of water that is entered into under 
     section 5 of the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System Act 
     of 2000 is approved by Congress and shall be approved and 
     executed by the Secretary.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. THOMPSON:
  S. 3067. A bill to amend title 44, United States Code, to make 
Government information security reform permanent, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Governmental Affairs.
  Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill which 
will make permanent a law which was intended to protect the security of 
Federal computers and information systems. Over the years, numerous 
Governmental Affairs Committee hearings and General Accounting Office 
reports uncovered and identified systemic failures of government 
information systems which highlighted our Nation's vulnerability to 
computer attacks, from international and domestic terrorists to crime 
rings to everyday hackers. As a result, Congress enacted the Government 
Information Security Reform Act as part of the Floyd D. Spence National 
Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2001, Public Law 106-398. 
Since its passage in the 106th Congress, the law has required Federal 
agencies to develop and implement security policies and provided the 
Office of Management and Budget authority to demand from agencies 
better plans for improving computer security. Unfortunately, this 
relatively new law is set to expire next month.
  The information security legislation upon which the law is based, 
which I sponsored along with Senator Lieberman, was reported by the 
Governmental Affairs Committee and passed by the Senate with no sunset 
provision. A two-year sunset was added in conference providing that the 
law expire on November 29, 2002.
  The bill I am introducing today would repeal the sunset and restore 
the language to what originally was approved by the Governmental 
Affairs Committee and the Senate last Congress. Further, given that the 
law is commonly referred to as the ``Government Information Security 
Reform Act,'' the bill also would codify that short title.
  We must ensure that Federal agencies continue to protect their assets 
and prevent hackers and cyberterrorists from wreaking havoc with 
citizens' sensitive information, such as taxpayer data, veterans' 
medical records, and social security portfolios. We must not let this 
law expire.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SPECTER:
  S. 3068. A bill to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act to require 
the Secretary of Agriculture to use the price of feed grains and other 
cash expenses as factors to determine the basic formula price for milk 
under milk marketing orders; to the Committee on Agriculture, 
Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I had sought recognition initially to 
discuss two other subjects. While the issue of Iraq is very much on the 
minds of the American people and the focus of attention worldwide, 
there are other important considerations which are pending and are of 
interest to Pennsylvanians and what is happening with the economy.
  We really cannot let our attention focus solely on Iraq.
  There are many matters which involve important economic issues and 
great numbers of jobs. That is a subject that is very much on my mind 
with respect to the Pennsylvania dairy farmers. I propose to introduce 
legislation this afternoon on that subject.
  Agriculture is the largest industry in Pennsylvania, and dairy is its 
single largest component. Pennsylvania is the fourth largest dairy 
producer in the Nation. We have approximately 10,300 dairy farms which 
produce $1.710 billion worth of milk each year.
  Regrettably, over the past decades, Pennsylvania has lost an average 
of 300 to 500 dairy farmers per year. In the years 1993 to 1998, 
Pennsylvania lost more than 11 percent of its dairy farmers. That is 
because Pennsylvania farmers have had to deal with drought and other 
natural disasters, high feed and transportation costs, and other 
variables that challenge their ability to sustain their farms, but 
mostly because the cost of production exceeds what has been the average 
price for class 3 dairy products. It varies tremendously. It was $15.90 
in September of last year. It went down to $9.92 in September of this 
year. The cost has been tremendous.
  Meanwhile, the average cost of production of milk in Pennsylvania per 
hundredweight is calculated by the Pennsylvania Department of 
Agriculture. The average was $14.32 in the year 2001. The price for 
milk in January of 2002 was $11.87 per hundredweight, going down to 
$10.82 per hundredweight in May, and $9.54 per hundredweight in August 
of this year. The cost of production exceeds what the Pennsylvania 
dairy farmers are able to obtain for their milk.
  I serve on the Agriculture Subcommittee of Appropriations. On May 14 
of last year at an extensive hearing in Philadelphia, we heard from 
economists, we heard from farmers, and an analysis for merchants and an 
analysis of what was happening on dairy farming.
  It is a complex matter. While the price of milk goes down for dairy 
farmers, the cost of milk goes up to the consumer. I know at the shop 
where I buy a half-gallon of milk, it was $1.89, and it jumped to $2.19 
for a half-gallon of milk at the precise time when the payments made to 
the dairy farmers were going down. It seems to me there really has to 
be an additional factor in the calculation of these prices by the U.S. 
Department of Agriculture.
  It is for that reason that I am proposing legislation today which 
would amend section 8(c)(5) of the Agriculture Adjustment Act with 
amendments by the Agriculture Marketing Agreement Act of 1937 to add 
the following:
  Subsection M, using as factors to determine the basic formula price 
for milk under an order issued pursuant to this section (i) the price 
of feed grains, including the cost of concentrates, by-products, 
liquid, whey, hay, silage, pasture, and other forage; and (ii) other 
cash expenses, including the cost of hauling, artificial insemination, 
veterinary services and medicine, bedding and litter, marketing, custom 
services and supplies, fuel, lubrication, electricity, machinery and 
building repairs, labor, association fees, and assessments.
  During the course of the July and August break, I traveled 
extensively on open house town meetings throughout Pennsylvania. I 
heard recurrent complaints from the dairy farmers about being unable to 
maintain the dairy farms. It is a very important matter that the small 
dairy farmers be able to continue to produce milk, which is a very 
important item in our daily diets. I don't think I need to expand upon 
that point.
  But the dairy farmers are facing enormous problems. We had hoped 
there would be a dairy compact. There had been one for the New England 
States. Legislation has been introduced--S. 1157--which is now pending 
before the Judiciary Committee. And the dairy compact would be of 
material assistance to farmers generally but certainly farmers in 
Pennsylvania.
  We had many Senators supporting the dairy compact concept but have 
had contentious battles on the Senate floor. And while the proposed 
legislation on the dairy compact was pending, I do propose the 
legislation to which I refer, and I send that amendment to the desk.

                          ____________________