[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 11, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2188-S2222]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

  By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Miller, Mr. Grassley, Mr. 
Bayh, and Mr. Lugar):
  S. 339. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to simplify 
the application of the excise tax imposed on bows and arrows; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, along with my colleagues, Senators Hatch, 
Miller, Bayh and Grassley, I am pleased to introduce the Archery Excise 
Tax Simplification Act of 2003. This bill will protect funding for the 
Wildlife Restoration Program, the Pittman-Robertson fund, by 
simplifying administration and compliance with the excise tax and 
closing an unintended loophole that allows arrows assembled outside the 
United States to avoid the excise tax imposed on domestic 
manufacturers.
  The creation of the Wildlife Restoration Program is one of the great 
success stories of cooperation among America's sportsmen and women, 
State fish and wildlife agencies, and the sporting goods industry. 
Working together with Congress, Americans who enjoy the outdoors 
volunteered to pay an excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition to be 
used for hunter education programs, wildlife restoration, and habitat 
conservation.
  Originally the archery industry did not participate in this program. 
However, the growth of bow hunting in the '60s and '70s led the archery 
industry to decide they would support the excise tax that funds State 
game agencies. As a result, the tax was extended to archery equipment 
in 1975. The tax on archery equipment was meant to parallel the tax 
that hunters were paying on firearms and ready-to-fire ammunition. The 
archery industry and bow hunters are pleased to contribute to the 
success of the Wildlife Restoration Program.
  Because current law taxes components and not arrows, foreign 
manufacturers are selling arrows in the United States without paying 
the excise tax

[[Page S2189]]

that is imposed on arrows made in the United States. Not only are these 
untaxed imports unfair to American workers, they threaten the integrity 
of the Wildlife Restoration Fund.
  This issue is important to companies in Montana. Mike Ellig, a 
manufacturer of archery products in Bozeman, MT, pays this tax. He 
supports the tax, but asks that it be fair. Mike's company, Montana 
Black Gold, and the archery industry want to support the Wildlife 
Restoration Program. But the way the tax works today, American 
manufacturers are at a competitive disadvantage. That is why the 800 
members of the Montana Bowhunters Association support this measure.
  This legislation will close the loophole that allows imported arrows 
to avoid the excise tax paid by domestic manufacturers. While keeping 
the current 12.4 percent tax on arrow components, the proposal will 
impose a tax of 12 percent on the first sale of an arrow assembled from 
untaxed components. U.S. manufacturers and foreign manufacturers will 
be treated equally.
  Since this loophole was inadvertently created in 1997, archery 
imports, mostly finished arrows, increased from $430,000 in 1998, to 
$1.6 million in 1999, to $3.2 million in 2000, to $7.8 million in 2001 
and to $11.0 million in 2002, through November. If Congress does not 
act quickly to close this loophole, domestic manufacturers will be 
forced to relocate outside of the United States. They simply cannot 
afford to lose market share for a fifth year to competitors who do not 
pay the same tax they pay. If a few more move overseas, the rest will 
follow. The result will be a catastrophic loss of revenue for the 
Federal Wildlife Restoration Fund.
  Current law also taxes non-hunters, contrary to Congressional intent. 
To relieve non-hunters from the requirement to pay for wildlife 
management, the legislation would eliminate the current-law tax on bows 
with draw weights of less than 30 pounds. Those bows are not suitable 
or, in many states, legal for hunting. To preserve the revenue for the 
Wildlife Restoration Fund, the bill would retain the current tax on 
bows that are suitable for hunting.
  The proposal would also clarify that broadheads are an accessory 
taxed at 11 percent rather than as an arrow component taxed at 12.4 
percent. This will correct the ambiguity in the 1997 Act that led to 
the misclassification of broadheads.
  In summary, the Arrow Excise Tax Simplification Act of 2001 would 
accomplish worthy objectives. It would close the loophole that allows 
foreign imported arrows to escape the tax and remove the tax on youth 
and recreational archery equipment that were never meant to be taxed. 
We will accomplish these goals while protecting the Wildlife 
Restoration Program by ensuring that there is no significant diminution 
of revenues collected by the archery excise tax. The Joint Committee on 
Taxation estimates the proposal will decrease revenues by $5 million 
over ten years resulting in small changes in outlays from the Federal 
Aid in Wildlife Fund. Failure to close the import loophole will 
eviscerate the archery tax base resulting in devastating losses to the 
Fund.
  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. 339

       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 ``Arrow Excise Tax 
     Simplification Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. SIMPLIFICATION OF EXCISE TAX IMPOSED ON BOWS AND 
                   ARROWS.

       (a) Bows.--Section 4161(b)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to bows) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) Bows.--
       ``(A) In general.--There is hereby imposed on the sale by 
     the manufacturer, producer, or importer of any bow which has 
     a draw weight of 30 pounds or more, a tax equal to 11 percent 
     of the price for which so sold.
       ``(B) Archery equipment.--There is hereby imposed on the 
     sale by the manufacturer, producer, or importer--
       ``(i) of any part or accessory suitable for inclusion in or 
     attachment to a bow described in subparagraph (A), and
       ``(ii) of any quiver or broadhead suitable for use with an 
     arrow described in paragraph (3),

     a tax equal to 11 percent of the price for which so sold.''.
       (b) Arrows.--Section 4161(b) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to bows and arrows, etc.) is amended by 
     redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph (4) and inserting 
     after paragraph (2) the following:
       ``(3) Arrows.--
       ``(A) In general.--There is hereby imposed on the sale by 
     the manufacturer, producer, or importer of any arrow, a tax 
     equal to 12 percent of the price for which so sold.
       ``(B) Exception.--The tax imposed by subparagraph (A) on an 
     arrow shall not apply if the arrow contains an arrow shaft 
     subject to the tax imposed by paragraph (2).
       ``(C) Arrow.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term 
     `arrow' means any shaft described in paragraph (2) to which 
     additional components are attached.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--The heading of section 
     4161(b)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     arrows) is amended by striking ``Arrows.--'' and inserting 
     ``Arrow Components.--''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to articles sold by the manufacturer, producer, 
     or importer after December 31, 2003.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DASCHLE (for himself and Mr. Johnson):
  S. 341. A bill to designate the Federal building and United States 
courthouse located at 515 9th Street in Rapid City, South Dakota, as 
the ``Andrew W. Bogue Federal Building and United States Courthouse''; 
to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation on 
behalf of Senator Tim Johnson and myself to name the Rapid City United 
States Courthouse and Federal Building in honor of Judge Andrew W. 
Bogue, Senior Judge of the U.S. District Court of the District of South 
Dakota.
  The administration of justice in western South Dakota is nearly 
synonymous with the name of Judge Bogue. He is almost single-handedly 
responsible for establishing the Federal district court in Rapid City, 
and worked tirelessly to see the Courthouse and Federal Building 
constructed there to provide a new home for the administration of 
justice in the area.
  Judge Bogue was the first resident judge in the western division of 
the U.S. District Court District of South Dakota. Before he came along, 
judges had to travel into the division from other parts of the State, 
and court was held in the ancient Deadwood Territorial Courthouse or in 
makeshift courtrooms throughout the 11-county region. Faced with the 
logistical hassles of court operations, attorneys were less likely to 
use the court system.
  After Judge Bogue took the bench, he helped transform the justice 
system in western South Dakota. First, he oversaw the establishment of 
a new district seat in Rapid City, the population center. Then he 
worked alongside South Dakota's congressional delegation to secure 
funding for the construction of the Rapid City Federal Building and 
United States Courthouse.
  During the course of his career as a Federal judge, Bogue has 
presided over many high-profile cases, including cases stemming from 
American Indian Movement, AIM, uprisings in the 1970s. He has 
maintained a reputation for being fair, objective, and compassionate.
  Before rising to the U.S. District Court bench, Andrew Bogue was 
educated at South Dakota State University. After serving our Nation 
with the U.S. Army Signal Corps during World War II, he returned home 
to complete a law degree at the University of South Dakota and to marry 
his lovely wife Liz. He was admitted to the South Dakota Bar in 1947.
  Andrew Bogue again answered the call to defend our country during the 
Korean War, serving in the U.S. Army's Judge Advocate General's corps. 
Upon his return, he practiced as a private attorney and a State's 
Attorney before becoming a South Dakota circuit court judge. He joined 
the Federal bench on May 1, 1970, and was elevated to Chief Judge in 
1980. He took senior status in 1985.
  It is right and fitting that the Rapid City Federal Building and 
Courthouse be named for the individual whose legacy pervades its halls. 
The legislation Senator Johnson and I introduce today began with an 
outpouring of support from Judge Bogue's colleagues. The Pennington 
County Bar Association and the Seventh Judicial Circuit Court Judges 
and Magistrate Judges have

[[Page S2190]]

passed resolutions supporting this initiative. I am proud to offer this 
legislation in honor of a great South Dakotan.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 341

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

     SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF ANDREW W. BOGUE FEDERAL BUILDING 
                   AND UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.

       The Federal building and United States courthouse located 
     at 515 9th Street in Rapid City, South Dakota, shall be known 
     and designated as the ``Andrew W. Bogue Federal Building and 
     United States Courthouse''.

     SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

       Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, 
     or other record of the United States to the Federal building 
     and United States courthouse referred to in section 1 shall 
     be deemed to be a reference to the Andrew W. Bogue Federal 
     Building and United States Courthouse.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. GREGG (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Dodd, and Mr. 
        Alexander):
  S. 342. A bill to amend the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
to make improvements to and reauthorize programs under that Act, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, last year our Nation was stunned by a 
videotape of a mother beating her 4 year old daughter in the parking 
lot of a shopping center. Yet the unfortunate fact is that each year, 
behind closed doors, close to one million children in the United States 
are abused or neglected and as a result, are in need of assistance and 
out-of-home care.
  I am pleased today to be joined by Senators Kennedy, Dodd and 
Alexander, in introducing legislation aimed at reducing child abuse and 
neglect and mitigating its very damaging impact. The ``Keeping Children 
and Families Safe Act of 2003'' reauthorizes four key programs designed 
to do just that.
  First, we reauthorize the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, 
CAPTA, which provides grants to States to improve child protection 
systems and to support community-based family resource and support 
services. CAPTA also authorizes research and demonstration projects 
aimed at preventing and treating child abuse and neglect.
  The last reauthorization of CAPTA in 1996 made significant changes in 
this program to better target limited Federal resources and to enhance 
the ability of States to respond to the most serious cases of abuse and 
neglect. Unfortunately, the issues facing an overburdened child welfare 
system are seldom easily resolved. The Keeping Children and Families 
Safe Act will build upon previous changes to CAPTA, by enhancing the 
CPS workforce and continuing to ensure that children and families 
receive appropriate services and referrals.
  The legislation my colleagues and I are introducing today encourages 
new training and better qualifications for child and family service 
workers. With this reauthorization, States can give additional training 
to CPS workers on how to best work with families from the time that the 
CPS worker walks through the door of a home to the point of treatment 
for the child and family.
  In 2000, CPS workers nationwide investigated 1.7 million cases of 
reported Child Abuse and Neglect. The environments in which CPS workers 
conduct these investigations can vary greatly in level of safety. With 
this legislation, States will be able to use Federal dollars to provide 
some personal safety training for CPS workers for when they enter the 
home. Additionally, the rights of families are also addressed during 
the initial stages of investigation, by requiring CPS workers to inform 
individuals of child maltreatment allegations made against them.
  During their investigations, CPS workers encounter a myriad of types 
of abuse. In 2000, approximately 63 percent of children who were 
victims of maltreatment suffered neglect, 19 percent suffered physical 
abuse, 10 percent suffered sexual abuse, and 8 percent suffered 
emotional maltreatment. In order to help insure that cases of abuse and 
neglect are properly identified, States would be able to provide cross-
training for CPS workers to help them better recognize neglect, 
domestic violence or substance abuse in a family. This bill would also 
enhance linkages between child protection services and education, 
health, mental health, and judicial systems. Further, it would 
encourage greater collaboration with the juvenile justice system to 
ensure that children who move between these two systems do so smoothly 
and receive the proper services.
  As a condition of receiving state grant money, we ask States to have 
policies and procedures, including referral to CPS, to address the 
needs of infants who have been prenatally exposed to illegal 
substances. We also require States to perform background checks on all 
adults in prospective foster care households. Current law only requires 
that checks be performed on the prospective foster care parent.
  We have all heard the horrific accounts in the media of those 
children who slip through the cracks of the child protective system. It 
is our hope that with this reauthorization, which includes an increase 
in authorization to $200 million, we can help States to fill some of 
those cracks.
  The second program we reauthorize is the Adoption Opportunities Act. 
This Act is intended to eliminate barriers to adoption and to 
provide permanent homes for children, particularly children who are 
hard to place, including children with special needs, older children, 
and disabled infants with life-threatening conditions.

  With 131,000 children currently waiting for adoption, we must improve 
upon this program by seeking to further tear down barriers to adoption. 
Specifically--we are placing an increased emphasis on the elimination 
of inter-jurisdictional barriers to adoption.
  This Act would require the Secretary of the Department of Health and 
Human Services to fund public or private entities, including States, to 
develop a uniform home-study standard and protocols for acceptance of 
home-studies between States and jurisdictions. The Secretary would also 
help to facilitate cross-jurisdictional placements by developing models 
of financing, expanding capacity of all adoption exchanges to serve 
increasing numbers of children, training social workers on preparing 
and moving children across State lines, and developing and supporting 
models for networking among agencies, adoption exchange, and parent 
support groups across jurisdictional boundaries.
  Within one year of enactment, the bill would require the Department 
of Health and Human Services, in consultation with the General 
Accounting Office, to facilitate the inter-jurisdictional adoption of 
foster children. Additionally, the bill would also make inter-
jurisdictional adoption issues--including financing and best 
practices--a part of a larger study HHS would be required to conduct on 
adoption placements. Current law generally allows HHS to fund services 
provided by public and nonprofit private agencies only. To help 
facilitate this process, we would double the current authorization for 
this title from $20 million to $40 million.
  Third, the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003 
reauthorizes the Abandoned Infants Assistance Act. This program 
authorizes demonstration grants to public and private nonprofit 
agencies for activities aimed at preventing the abandonment of infants, 
identifying and addressing the needs of abandoned infants, and 
recruiting and training foster families for abandoned children.
  Currently, grant recipients must ensure that priority for their 
services is given to abandoned infants and young children who are HIV-
infected, perinatally exposed to HIV, or perinatally drug-exposed. This 
legislation, which includes and increase in authorization to $45 
million, would broaden priority for services to include abandoned 
infants and young children who have life threatening illnesses or other 
special medical needs.
  Finally, we reauthorize the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
Act, FVPSA, which assists in efforts to increase public awareness about 
family violence and provide immediate shelter and related assistance to 
victims of family violence and their children.

[[Page S2191]]

  This reauthorization increases the authorization for the National 
Domestic Violence Hotline to $5 million and establishes a National 
Domestic Violence Shelter Network to link domestic violence shelters 
and service providers and the National Domestic Violence Hotline on a 
confidential website. The website would provide a continuously updated 
list of shelter availability anywhere in the United States at any time 
and would provide comprehensive information describing the services 
each shelter provides such as medical, social and bilingual services. 
It would also provide internet access to shelters that do not have 
appropriate technology.
  Domestic violence and child abuse affect thousands upon thousands of 
families each year, often with tragic results. In the year 2000 alone, 
1200 children died as a consequence of child abuse and neglect, 85 
percent of whom were under the age of 6. We must continue our efforts 
to stem the tide of abuse to prevent these dreadful results. This 
legislation reauthorizes four programs that address the needs of some 
of our most at-risk children and families, and I urge my colleagues' 
support.
  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. 342

       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 ``Keeping 
     Children and Families Safe Act of 2003''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

           TITLE I--CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT ACT

Sec. 101. Findings.

                      Subtitle A--General Program

Sec. 111. National clearinghouse for information relating to child 
              abuse.
Sec. 112. Research and assistance activities and demonstrations.
Sec. 113. Grants to States and public or private agencies and 
              organizations.
Sec. 114. Grants to States for child abuse and neglect prevention and 
              treatment programs.
Sec. 115. Miscellaneous requirements relating to assistance.
Sec. 116. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 117. Reports.

  Subtitle B--Community-Based Grants for the Prevention of Child Abuse

Sec. 121. Purpose and authority.
Sec. 122. Eligibility.
Sec. 123. Amount of grant.
Sec. 124. Existing grants.
Sec. 125. Application.
Sec. 126. Local program requirements.
Sec. 127. Performance measures.
Sec. 128. National network for community-based family resource 
              programs.
Sec. 129. Definitions.
Sec. 130. Authorization of appropriations.

                   Subtitle C--Conforming Amendments

Sec. 141. Conforming amendments.

                    TITLE II--ADOPTION OPPORTUNITIES

Sec. 201. Congressional findings and declaration of purpose.
Sec. 202. Information and services.
Sec. 203. Study of adoption placements.
Sec. 204. Studies on successful adoptions.
Sec. 205. Authorization of appropriations.

                TITLE III--ABANDONED INFANTS ASSISTANCE

Sec. 301. Findings.
Sec. 302. Establishment of local projects.
Sec. 303. Evaluations, study, and reports by Secretary.
Sec. 304. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 305. Definitions.

         TITLE IV--FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND SERVICES ACT

Sec. 401. State demonstration grants.
Sec. 402. Secretarial responsibilities.
Sec. 403. Evaluation.
Sec. 404. Information and technical assistance centers.
Sec. 405. Authorization of appropriations.
Sec. 406. Grants for State domestic violence coalitions.
Sec. 407. Evaluation and monitoring.
Sec. 408. Family member abuse information and documentation project.
Sec. 409. Model State leadership grants.
Sec. 410. National domestic violence hotline grant.
Sec. 411. Youth education and domestic violence.
Sec. 412. National domestic violence shelter network.
Sec. 413. Demonstration grants for community initiatives.
Sec. 414. Transitional housing assistance.
Sec. 415. Technical and conforming amendments.

           TITLE I--CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT ACT

     SEC. 101. FINDINGS.

       Section 2 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5101 note) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``close to 1,000,000'' 
     and inserting ``approximately 900,000'';
       (2) by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (11) as 
     paragraphs (4) through (13), respectively;
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2)(A) more children suffer neglect than any other form 
     of maltreatment; and
       ``(B) investigations have determined that approximately 63 
     percent of children who were victims of maltreatment in 2000 
     suffered neglect, 19 percent suffered physical abuse, 10 
     percent suffered sexual abuse, and 8 percent suffered 
     emotional maltreatment;
       ``(3)(A) child abuse can result in the death of a child;
       ``(B) in 2000, an estimated 1,200 children were counted by 
     child protection services to have died as a result of abuse 
     or neglect; and
       ``(C) children younger than 1 year old comprised 44 percent 
     of child abuse fatalities and 85 percent of child abuse 
     fatalities were younger than 6 years of age;'';
       (4) by striking paragraph (4) (as so redesignated), and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(4)(A) many of these children and their families fail to 
     receive adequate protection and treatment;
       ``(B) slightly less than half of these children (45 percent 
     in 2000) and their families fail to receive adequate 
     protection or treatment; and
       ``(C) in fact, approximately 80 percent of all children 
     removed from their homes and placed in foster care in 2000, 
     as a result of an investigation or assessment conducted by 
     the child protective services agency, received no 
     services;'';
       (5) in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``organizations'' and 
     inserting ``community-based organizations'';
       (B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``ensures'' and all 
     that follows through ``knowledge,'' and inserting 
     ``recognizes the need for properly trained staff with the 
     qualifications needed''; and
       (C) in subparagraph (E), by inserting before the semicolon 
     the following: ``, which may impact child rearing patterns, 
     while at the same time, not allowing those differences to 
     enable abuse'';
       (6) in paragraph (7) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``this national child and family emergency'' and inserting 
     ``child abuse and neglect''; and
       (7) in paragraph (9) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) by striking ``intensive'' and inserting ``needed''; and
       (B) by striking ``if removal has taken place'' and 
     inserting ``where appropriate''.

                      Subtitle A--General Program

     SEC. 111. NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE FOR INFORMATION RELATING TO 
                   CHILD ABUSE.

       (a) Functions.--Section 103(b) of the Child Abuse 
     Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5104(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``all programs,'' and all 
     that follows through ``neglect; and'' and inserting ``all 
     effective programs, including private and community-based 
     programs, that show promise of success with respect to the 
     prevention, assessment, identification, and treatment of 
     child abuse and neglect and hold the potential for broad 
     scale implementation and replication;'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon;
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) maintain information about the best practices used 
     for achieving improvements in child protective systems;''; 
     and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) provide technical assistance upon request that may 
     include an evaluation or identification of--
       ``(A) various methods and procedures for the investigation, 
     assessment, and prosecution of child physical and sexual 
     abuse cases;
       ``(B) ways to mitigate psychological trauma to the child 
     victim; and
       ``(C) effective programs carried out by the States under 
     this Act; and
       ``(5) collect and disseminate information relating to 
     various training resources available at the State and local 
     level to--
       ``(A) individuals who are engaged, or who intend to engage, 
     in the prevention, identification, and treatment of child 
     abuse and neglect; and
       ``(B) appropriate State and local officials to assist in 
     training law enforcement, legal, judicial, medical, mental 
     health, education, and child welfare personnel.''.
       (b) Coordination With Available Resources.--Section 
     103(c)(1) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5104(c)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``105(a); and'' and 
     inserting ``104(a);'';
       (2) by redesignating subparagraph (F) as subparagraph (G); 
     and
       (3) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following:
       ``(F) collect and disseminate information that describes 
     best practices being used throughout the Nation for making 
     appropriate referrals related to, and addressing, the 
     physical, developmental, and mental health needs of abused 
     and neglected children; and''.

[[Page S2192]]

     SEC. 112. RESEARCH AND ASSISTANCE ACTIVITIES AND 
                   DEMONSTRATIONS.

       (a) Research.--Section 104(a) of the Child Abuse Prevention 
     and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5105(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), in the first 
     sentence, by inserting ``, including longitudinal research,'' 
     after ``interdisciplinary program of research''; and
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting before the semicolon 
     the following: ``, including the effects of abuse and neglect 
     on a child's development and the identification of successful 
     early intervention services or other services that are 
     needed'';
       (C) in subparagraph (C)--
       (i) by striking ``judicial procedures'' and inserting 
     ``judicial systems, including multidisciplinary, coordinated 
     decisionmaking procedures''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and'' at the end; and
       (D) in subparagraph (D)--
       (i) in clause (viii), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (ii) by redesignating clause (ix) as clause (x); and
       (iii) by inserting after clause (viii), the following:
       ``(ix) the incidence and prevalence of child maltreatment 
     by a wide array of demographic characteristics such as age, 
     sex, race, family structure, household relationship 
     (including the living arrangement of the resident parent and 
     family size), school enrollment and education attainment, 
     disability, grandparents as caregivers, labor force status, 
     work status in previous year, and income in previous year; 
     and'';
       (E) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (I); 
     and
       (F) by inserting after subparagraph (C), the following:
       ``(D) the evaluation and dissemination of best practices 
     consistent with the goals of achieving improvements in the 
     child protective services systems of the States in accordance 
     with paragraphs (1) through (12) of section 106(a);
       ``(E) effective approaches to interagency collaboration 
     between the child protection system and the juvenile justice 
     system that improve the delivery of services and treatment, 
     including methods for continuity of treatment plan and 
     services as children transition between systems;
       ``(F) an evaluation of the redundancies and gaps in the 
     services in the field of child abuse and neglect prevention 
     in order to make better use of resources;
       ``(G) the nature, scope, and practice of voluntary 
     relinquishment for foster care or State guardianship of low 
     income children who need  health services, including mental 
     health services;
       ``(H) the information on the national incidence of child 
     abuse and neglect specified in clauses (i) through (xi) of 
     subparagraph (H); and'';
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(B) Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of 
     the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003, and every 
     2 years thereafter, the Secretary shall provide an 
     opportunity for public comment concerning the priorities 
     proposed under subparagraph (A) and maintain an official 
     record of such public comment.'';
       (3) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (4);
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) Research.--The Secretary shall conduct research on 
     the national incidence of child abuse and neglect, including 
     the information on the national incidence on child abuse and 
     neglect specified in subparagraphs (i) through (ix) of 
     paragraph (1)(I).
       ``(3) Report.--Not later than 4 years after the date of the 
     enactment of the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 
     2003, the Secretary shall prepare and submit to the Committee 
     on Education and the Workforce of the House of 
     Representatives and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor 
     and Pensions of the Senate a report that contains the results 
     of the research conducted under paragraph (2).''.
       (b) Provision of Technical Assistance.--Section 104(b) of 
     the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5105(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by striking ``nonprofit private agencies and'' and 
     inserting ``private agencies and community-based''; and
       (B) by inserting ``, including replicating successful 
     program models,'' after ``programs and activities''; and
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) effective approaches being utilized to link child 
     protective service agencies with health care, mental health 
     care, and developmental services to improve forensic 
     diagnosis and health evaluations, and barriers and shortages 
     to such linkages.''.
       (c) Demonstration Programs and Projects.--Section 104 of 
     the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5105) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Demonstration Programs and Projects.--The Secretary 
     may award grants to, and enter into contracts with, States or 
     public or private agencies or organizations (or combinations 
     of such agencies or organizations) for time-limited, 
     demonstration projects for the following:
       ``(1) Promotion of safe, family-friendly physical 
     environments for visitation and exchange.--The Secretary may 
     award grants under this subsection to entities to assist such 
     entities in establishing and operating safe, family-friendly 
     physical environments--
       ``(A) for court-ordered, supervised visitation between 
     children and abusing parents; and
       ``(B) to safely facilitate the exchange of children for 
     visits with noncustodial parents in cases of domestic 
     violence.
       ``(2) Education identification, prevention, and 
     treatment.--The Secretary may award grants under this 
     subsection to entities for projects that provide educational 
     identification, prevention, and treatment services in 
     cooperation with preschool and elementary and secondary 
     schools.
       ``(3) Risk and safety assessment tools.--The Secretary may 
     award grants under this subsection to entities for projects 
     that provide for the development of effective and research-
     based risk and safety assessment tools relating to child 
     abuse and neglect.
       ``(4) Training.--The Secretary may award grants under this 
     subsection to entities for projects that involve effective 
     and research-based innovative training for mandated child 
     abuse and neglect reporters.
       ``(5) Comprehensive adolescent victim/victimizer prevention 
     programs.--The Secretary may award grants to organizations 
     that demonstrate innovation in preventing child sexual abuse 
     through school-based programs in partnership with parents and 
     community-based organizations to establish a network of 
     trainers who will work with schools to implement the program. 
     The program shall be comprehensive, meet State guidelines for 
     health education, and should reduce child sexual abuse by 
     focusing on prevention for both adolescent victims and 
     victimizers.''.

     SEC. 113. GRANTS TO STATES AND PUBLIC OR PRIVATE AGENCIES AND 
                   ORGANIZATIONS.

       (a) Demonstration Programs and Projects.--Section 105(a) of 
     the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5106(a)) is amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading, by striking 
     ``Demonstration'' and inserting ``Grants for'';
       (2) in the matter preceding paragraph (1)--
       (A) by inserting ``States,'' after ``contracts with,'';
       (B) by striking ``nonprofit''; and
       (C) by striking ``time limited, demonstration'';
       (3) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``nonprofit'';
       (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``law, education, 
     social work, and other relevant fields'' and inserting ``law 
     enforcement, judiciary, social work and child protection, 
     education, and other relevant fields, or individuals such as 
     court appointed special advocates (CASAs) and guardian ad 
     litem,'';
       (C) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``nonprofit'' and all 
     that follows through ``; and'' and inserting ``children, 
     youth and family service organizations in order to prevent 
     child abuse and neglect;'';
       (D) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (E) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(D) for training to support the enhancement of linkages 
     between child protective service agencies and health care 
     agencies, including physical and mental health services, to 
     improve forensic diagnosis and health evaluations and for 
     innovative partnerships between child protective service 
     agencies and health care agencies that offer creative 
     approaches to using existing Federal, State, local, and 
     private funding to meet the health evaluation needs of 
     children who have been subjects of substantiated cases of 
     child abuse or neglect;
       ``(E) for the training of personnel in best practices to 
     promote collaboration with the families from the initial time 
     of contact during the investigation through treatment;
       ``(F) for the training of personnel regarding the legal 
     duties of such personnel and their responsibilities to 
     protect the legal rights of children and families;
       ``(G) for improving the training of supervisory and 
     nonsupervisory child welfare workers;
       ``(H) for enabling State child welfare agencies to 
     coordinate the provision of services with State and local 
     health care agencies, alcohol and drug abuse prevention and 
     treatment agencies, mental health agencies, and other public 
     and private welfare agencies to promote child safety, 
     permanence, and family stability;
       ``(I) for cross training for child protective service 
     workers in effective and research-based methods for 
     recognizing situations of substance abuse, domestic violence, 
     and neglect; and
       ``(J) for developing, implementing, or operating 
     information and education programs or training programs 
     designed to improve the provision of services to disabled 
     infants with life-threatening conditions for--
       ``(i) professionals and paraprofessional personnel 
     concerned with the welfare of disabled infants with life-
     threatening conditions, including personnel employed in child 
     protective services programs and health care facilities; and
       ``(ii) the parents of such infants.'';

[[Page S2193]]

       (4) by redesignating paragraph (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (3) and (4), respectively;
       (5) by inserting after paragraph (1), the following:
       ``(2) Triage procedures.--The Secretary may award grants 
     under this subsection to public and private agencies that 
     demonstrate innovation in responding to reports of child 
     abuse and neglect, including programs of collaborative 
     partnerships between the State child protective services 
     agency, community social service agencies and family support 
     programs, law enforcement agencies, developmental disability 
     agencies, substance abuse treatment entities, health care 
     entities, domestic violence prevention entities, mental 
     health service entities, schools, churches and synagogues, 
     and other community agencies, to allow for the establishment 
     of a triage system that--
       ``(A) accepts, screens, and assesses reports received to 
     determine which such reports require an intensive 
     intervention and which require voluntary referral to another 
     agency, program, or project;
       ``(B) provides, either directly or through referral, a 
     variety of community-linked services to assist families in 
     preventing child abuse and neglect; and
       ``(C) provides further investigation and intensive 
     intervention where the child's safety is in jeopardy.'';
       (6) in paragraph (3) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``nonprofit organizations (such as Parents Anonymous)'' and 
     inserting ``organizations'';
       (7) in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) by striking the paragraph heading;
       (B) by striking subparagraphs (A) and (C); and
       (C) in subparagraph (B)--
       (i) by striking ``(B) Kinship
     care.--'' and inserting the following:
       ``(4) Kinship care.--
       ``(A) In general.--''; and
       (ii) by striking ``nonprofit''; and
       (8) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Linkages between child protective service agencies 
     and public health, mental health, and developmental 
     disabilities agencies.--The Secretary may award grants to 
     entities that provide linkages between State or local child 
     protective service agencies and public health, mental health, 
     and developmental disabilities agencies, for the purpose of 
     establishing linkages that are designed to help assure that a 
     greater number of substantiated victims of child maltreatment 
     have their physical health, mental health, and developmental 
     needs appropriately diagnosed and treated, in accordance with 
     all applicable Federal and State privacy laws.''.
       (b) Discretionary Grants.--Section 105(b) of the Child 
     Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``subsection (b)'' and inserting ``subsection (a)'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (1);
       (3) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs 
     (1) and (2), respectively;
       (4) by inserting after paragraph (2) (as so redesignated), 
     the following:
       ``(3) Programs based within children's hospitals or other 
     pediatric and adolescent care facilities, that provide model 
     approaches for improving medical diagnosis of child abuse and 
     neglect and for health evaluations of children for whom a 
     report of maltreatment has been substantiated.''; and
       (5) in paragraph (4)(D), by striking ``nonprofit''.
       (c) Evaluation.--Section 105(c) of the Child Abuse 
     Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106(c)) is amended--
       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``demonstration'';
       (2) in the second sentence, by inserting ``or contract'' 
     after ``or as a separate grant''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following: ``In the case of an 
     evaluation performed by the recipient of a grant, the 
     Secretary shall make available technical assistance for 
     the evaluation, where needed, including the use of a 
     rigorous application of scientific evaluation 
     techniques.''.
       (d) Technical Amendment to Heading.--The section heading 
     for section 105 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5106) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 105. GRANTS TO STATES AND PUBLIC OR PRIVATE AGENCIES 
                   AND ORGANIZATIONS.''.

     SEC. 114. GRANTS TO STATES FOR CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT 
                   PREVENTION AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS.

       (a) Development and Operation Grants.--Section 106(a) of 
     the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5106a(a)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) by inserting ``, including ongoing case monitoring,'' 
     after ``case management''; and
       (B) by inserting ``and treatment'' after ``and delivery of 
     services'';
       (2) in paragraph (4), by striking ``improving'' and all 
     that follows through ``referral systems'' and inserting 
     ``developing, improving, and implementing risk and safety 
     assessment tools and protocols'';
       (3) by striking paragraph (7);
       (4) by redesignating paragraphs (5), (6), (8), and (9) as 
     paragraphs (6), (8), (9), and (12), respectively;
       (5) by inserting after paragraph (4), the following:
       ``(5) developing and updating systems of technology that 
     support the program and track reports of child abuse and 
     neglect from intake through final disposition and allow 
     interstate and intrastate information exchange;'';
       (6) in paragraph (6) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``opportunities'' and all that follows through ``system'' and 
     inserting ``including--
       ``(A) training regarding effective and research-based 
     practices to promote collaboration with the families;
       ``(B) training regarding the legal duties of such 
     individuals; and
       ``(C) personal safety training for case workers;'';
       (7) by inserting after paragraph (6) (as so redesignated) 
     the following:
       ``(7) improving the skills, qualifications, and 
     availability of individuals providing services to children 
     and families, and the supervisors of such individuals, 
     through the child protection system, including improvements 
     in the recruitment and retention of caseworkers;'';
       (8) by striking paragraph (9) (as so redesignated), and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(9) developing and facilitating effective and research-
     based training protocols for individuals mandated to report 
     child abuse or neglect;
       ``(10) developing, implementing, or operating programs to 
     assist in obtaining or coordinating necessary services for 
     families of disabled infants with life-threatening 
     conditions, including--
       ``(A) existing social and health services;
       ``(B) financial assistance; and
       ``(C) services necessary to facilitate adoptive placement 
     of any such infants who have been relinquished for adoption;
       ``(11) developing and delivering information to improve 
     public education relating to the role and responsibilities of 
     the child protection system and the nature and basis for 
     reporting suspected incidents of child abuse and neglect;'';
       (9) in paragraph (12) (as so redesignated), by striking the 
     period and inserting a semicolon; and
       (10) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) supporting and enhancing interagency collaboration 
     between the child protection system and the juvenile justice 
     system for improved delivery of services and treatment, 
     including methods for continuity of treatment plan and 
     services as children transition between systems; or
       ``(14) supporting and enhancing collaboration among public 
     health agencies, the child protection system, and private 
     community-based programs to provide child abuse and neglect 
     prevention and treatment services (including linkages with 
     education systems) and to address the health needs, including 
     mental health needs, of children identified as abused or 
     neglected, including supporting prompt, comprehensive health 
     and developmental evaluations for children who are the 
     subject of substantiated child maltreatment reports.''.
       (b) Eligibility Requirements.--
       (1) In general.--Section 106(b) of the Child Abuse 
     Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106a(b)) is 
     amended--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(B)--
       (i) by striking ``provide notice to the Secretary of any 
     substantive changes'' and inserting the following: `` provide 
     notice to the Secretary--
       ``(i) of any substantive changes; and'';
       (ii) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(ii) any significant changes to how funds provided under 
     this section are used to support the activities which may 
     differ from the activities as described in the current State 
     application.'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)(A)--
       (i) by redesignating clauses (ii), (iii), (iv), (v), (vi), 
     (vii), (viii), (ix), (x), (xi), (xii), and (xiii) as clauses 
     (iv), (vi), (vii), (viii), (x), (xi), (xii), (xiii), (xiv), 
     (xv), (xvi) and (xvii), respectively;
       (ii) by inserting after clause (i), the following:
       ``(ii) policies and procedures (including appropriate 
     referrals to child protection service systems and for other 
     appropriate services) to address the needs of infants born 
     and identified as being affected by illegal substance abuse 
     or withdrawal symptoms resulting from prenatal drug exposure;
       ``(iii) the development of a plan of safe care for the 
     infant born and identified as being affected by illegal 
     substance abuse or withdrawal symptoms;'';
       (iii) in clause (iv) (as so redesignated), by inserting 
     ``risk and'' before ``safety'';
       (iv) by inserting after clause (iv) (as so redesignated), 
     the following:
       ``(v) triage procedures for the appropriate referral of a 
     child not at risk of imminent harm to a community 
     organization or voluntary preventive service;'';
       (v) in clause (viii)(II) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``, having a need for such information in order to carry out 
     its responsibilities under law to protect children from abuse 
     and neglect'' and inserting ``, as described in clause 
     (ix)'';
       (vi) by inserting after clause (viii) (as so redesignated), 
     the following:
       ``(ix) provisions to require a State to disclose 
     confidential information to any Federal, State, or local 
     government entity, or any agent of such entity, that has a 
     need for such information in order to carry out its 
     responsibilities under law to protect children from abuse and 
     neglect;'';
       (vii) in clause (xiii) (as so redesignated)--

       (I) by inserting ``who has received training appropriate to 
     the role, and'' after ``guardian ad litem,''; and
       (II) by inserting ``who has received training appropriate 
     to that role'' after ``advocate'';

[[Page S2194]]

       (viii) in clause (xv) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``to be effective not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this section'';
       (ix) in clause (xvi) (as so redesignated)--

       (I) by striking ``to be effective not later than 2 years 
     after the date of enactment of this section''; and
       (II) by striking ``and'' at the end;

       (x) in clause (xvii) (as so redesignated), by striking 
     ``clause (xii)'' each place that such appears and inserting 
     ``clause (xvi)''; and
       (xi) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(xviii) provisions and procedures to require that a 
     representative of the child protective services agency shall, 
     at the initial time of contact with the individual subject to 
     a child abuse and neglect investigation, advise the 
     individual of the complaints or allegations made against the 
     individual, in a manner that is consistent with laws 
     protecting the rights of the informant;
       ``(xix) provisions addressing the training of 
     representatives of the child protective services system 
     regarding the legal duties of the representatives, which may 
     consist of various methods of informing such representatives 
     of such duties, in order to protect the legal rights and 
     safety of children and families from the initial time of 
     contact during investigation through treatment;
       ``(xx) provisions and procedures for improving the 
     training, retention, and supervision of caseworkers; and
       ``(xxi) not later than 2 years after the date of enactment 
     of the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003, 
     provisions and procedures for requiring criminal background 
     record checks for prospective foster and adoptive parents and 
     other adult relatives and non-relatives residing in the 
     household;''; and
       (C) in paragraph (2), by adding at the end the following 
     flush sentence:
     ``Nothing in subparagraph (A) shall be construed to limit the 
     State's flexibility to determine State policies relating to 
     public access to court proceedings to determine child abuse 
     and neglect.''.
       (2) Limitation.--Section 106(b)(3) of the Child Abuse 
     Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106a(b)(3)) is 
     amended by striking ``With regard to clauses (v) and (vi) of 
     paragraph (2)(A)'' and inserting ``With regard to clauses 
     (vi) and (vii) of paragraph (2)(A)''.
       (c) Citizen Review Panels.--Section 106(c) of the Child 
     Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106a(c)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) in the matter preceding clause (i)--

       (I) by striking ``and procedures'' and inserting ``, 
     procedures, and practices''; and
       (II) by striking ``the agencies'' and inserting ``State and 
     local child protection system agencies''; and

       (ii) in clause (iii)(I), by striking ``State'' and 
     inserting ``State and local''; and
       (B) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) Public outreach.--Each panel shall provide for public 
     outreach and comment in order to assess the impact of current 
     procedures and practices upon children and families in the 
     community and in order to meet its obligations under 
     subparagraph (A).''; and
       (2) in paragraph (6)--
       (A) by striking ``public'' and inserting ``State and the 
     public''; and
       (B) by inserting before the period the following: ``and 
     recommendations to improve the child protection services 
     system at the State and local levels. Not later than 6 months 
     after the date on which a report is submitted by the panel to 
     the State, the appropriate State agency shall submit a 
     written response to the citizen review panel that describes 
     whether or how the State will incorporate the recommendations 
     of such panel (where appropriate) to make measurable progress 
     in improving the State and local child protective system''.
       (d) Annual State Data Reports.--Section 106(d) of the Child 
     Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106a(d)) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) The annual report containing the summary of the 
     activities of the citizen review panels of the State required 
     by subsection (c)(6).
       ``(14) The number of children under the care of the State 
     child protection system who are transferred into the custody 
     of the State juvenile justice system.''.
       (e) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services shall prepare and submit to Congress a report that 
     describes the extent to which States are implementing the 
     policies and procedures required under section 
     106(b)(2)(B)(ii) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment 
     Act.

     SEC. 115. MISCELLANEOUS REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO ASSISTANCE.

       Section 108 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5106d) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(d) GAO Study.--Not later than February 1, 2004, the 
     Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a 
     survey of a wide range of State and local child protection 
     service systems to evaluate and submit to Congress a report 
     concerning--
       ``(1) the current training (including cross-training in 
     domestic violence or substance abuse) of child protective 
     service workers in the outcomes for children and to analyze 
     and evaluate the effects of caseloads, compensation, and 
     supervision on staff retention and performance;
       ``(2) the efficiencies and effectiveness of agencies that 
     provide cross-training with court personnel; and
       ``(3) recommendations to strengthen child protective 
     service effectiveness to improve outcomes for children.
       ``(e) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that 
     the Secretary should encourage all States and public and 
     private agencies or organizations that receive assistance 
     under this title to ensure that children and families with 
     limited English proficiency who participate in programs under 
     this title are provided materials and services under such 
     programs in an appropriate language other than English.
       ``(f) Annual Report on Certain Programs.--A State that 
     receives funds under section 106(a) shall annually prepare 
     and submit to the Secretary a report describing the manner in 
     which funds provided under this Act, alone or in combination 
     with other Federal funds, were used to address the purposes 
     and achieve the objectives of section 105(a)(4)(B).''.

     SEC. 116. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) General Authorization.--Section 112(a)(1) of the Child 
     Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5106h(a)(1)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) General authorization.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out this title $120,000,000 for fiscal 
     year 2004 and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 
     fiscal years 2005 through 2008.''.
       (b) Demonstration Projects.--Section 112(a)(2)(B) of the 
     Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5106h(a)(2)(B)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Secretary make'' and inserting 
     ``Secretary shall make''; and
       (2) by striking ``section 106'' and inserting ``section 
     104''.

     SEC. 117. REPORTS.

       Section 110 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5106f) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(c) Study and Report Relating to Citizen Review Panels.--
       ``(1) Study.--The Secretary shall conduct a study by random 
     sample of the effectiveness of the citizen review panels 
     established under section 106(c).
       ``(2) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of 
     enactment of the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 
     2003, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on 
     Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives 
     and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 
     of the Senate a report that contains the results of the study 
     conducted under paragraph (1).''.

  Subtitle B--Community-Based Grants for the Prevention of Child Abuse

     SEC. 121. PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY.

       (a) Purpose.--Section 201(a)(1) of the Child Abuse 
     Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5116(a)(1)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(1) to support community-based efforts to develop, 
     operate, expand, enhance, and, where appropriate to network, 
     initiatives aimed at the prevention of child abuse and 
     neglect, and to support networks of coordinated resources and 
     activities to better strengthen and support families to 
     reduce the likelihood of child abuse and neglect; and''.
       (b) Authority.--Section 201(b) of the Child Abuse 
     Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5116(b)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking 
     ``Statewide'' and all that follows through the dash, and 
     inserting ``community-based and prevention-focused programs 
     and activities designed to strengthen and support families to 
     prevent child abuse and neglect (through networks where 
     appropriate) that are accessible, effective, culturally 
     appropriate, and build upon existing strengths-that--'';
       (B) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (C) by striking subparagraph (G) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(G) demonstrate a commitment to meaningful parent 
     leadership, including among parents of children with 
     disabilities, parents with disabilities, racial and ethnic 
     minorities, and members of other underrepresented or 
     underserved groups; and
       ``(H) provide referrals to early health and developmental 
     services;''; and
       (2) in paragraph (4)--
       (A) by inserting ``through leveraging of funds'' after 
     ``maximizing funding'';
       (B) by striking ``a Statewide network of community-based, 
     prevention-focused'' and inserting ``community-based and 
     prevention-focused''; and
       (C) by striking ``family resource and support program'' and 
     inserting ``programs and activities designed to strengthen 
     and support families to prevent child abuse and neglect 
     (through networks where appropriate)''.
       (c) Technical Amendment to Title Heading.--Title II of the 
     Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5116) is 
     amended by striking the heading for such title and inserting 
     the following:

 ``TITLE II--COMMUNITY-BASED GRANTS FOR THE PREVENTION OF CHILD ABUSE 
                             AND NEGLECT''.

     SEC. 122. ELIGIBILITY.

       Section 202 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5116a) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A)--
       (i) by striking ``a Statewide network of community-based, 
     prevention-focused'' and

[[Page S2195]]

     inserting ``community-based and prevention-focused''; and
       (ii) by striking ``family resource and support programs'' 
     and all that follows through the semicolon and inserting 
     ``programs and activities designed to strengthen and support 
     families to prevent child abuse and neglect (through networks 
     where appropriate);''
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ``that exists to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect'' after ``written authority of the State)'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``a network of 
     community-based family resource and support programs'' and 
     inserting ``community-based and prevention-focused programs 
     and activities designed to strengthen and support families to 
     prevent child abuse and neglect (through networks where 
     appropriate)'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B)--
       (i) by striking ``to the network''; and
       (ii) by inserting ``, and parents with disabilities'' 
     before the semicolon;
       (C) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``to the network''; 
     and
       (3) in paragraph (3)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``Statewide network of 
     community-based, prevention-focused, family resource and 
     support programs'' and inserting ``community-based and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect (through networks where appropriate)'';
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``Statewide network of 
     community-based, prevention-focused, family resource and 
     support programs'' and inserting ``community-based and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect (through networks where appropriate)'';
       (C) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``and training and 
     technical assistance, to the Statewide network of community-
     based, prevention-focused, family resource and support 
     programs'' and inserting ``training, technical assistance, 
     and evaluation assistance, to community-based and prevention-
     focused programs and activities designed to strengthen and 
     support families to prevent child abuse and neglect (through 
     networks where appropriate)''; and
       (D) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``, parents with 
     disabilities,'' after ``children with disabilities''.

     SEC. 123. AMOUNT OF GRANT.

       Section 203 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5116b) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1)(B)--
       (A) by striking ``as the amount leveraged by the State from 
     private, State, or other non-Federal sources and directed 
     through the'' and inserting ``as the amount of private, State 
     or other non-Federal funds leveraged and directed through the 
     currently designated'';
       (B) by striking ``State lead agency'' and inserting ``State 
     lead entity''; and
       (C) by striking ``the lead agency'' and inserting ``the 
     current lead entity''; and
       (2) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``subsection (a)'' 
     and inserting ``subsection (b)''.

     SEC. 124. EXISTING GRANTS.

       Section 204 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5115c) is repealed.

     SEC. 125. APPLICATION.

       Section 205 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5116d) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Statewide network of 
     community-based, prevention-focused, family resource and 
     support programs'' and inserting ``community-based and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect (through networks where appropriate)'';
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by striking ``network of community-based, prevention-
     focused, family resource and support programs'' and inserting 
     ``community-based and prevention-focused programs and 
     activities designed to strengthen and support families to 
     prevent child abuse and neglect (through networks where 
     appropriate)''; and
       (B) by striking ``, including those funded by programs 
     consolidated under this Act,'';
       (3) by striking paragraph (3), and inserting the following:
       ``(3) a description of the inventory of current unmet needs 
     and current community-based and prevention-focused programs 
     and activities to prevent child abuse and neglect, and other 
     family resource services operating in the State;'';
       (4) in paragraph (4), by striking ``State's network of 
     community-based, prevention-focused, family resource and 
     support programs'' and inserting ``community-based and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect'';
       (5) in paragraph (5), by striking ``Statewide network of 
     community-based, prevention-focused, family resource and 
     support programs'' and inserting ``start up, maintenance, 
     expansion, and redesign of community-based and prevention-
     focused programs and activities designed to strengthen and 
     support families to prevent child abuse and neglect'';
       (6) in paragraph (7), by striking ``individual community-
     based, prevention-focused, family resource and support 
     programs'' and inserting ``community-based and prevention-
     focused programs and activities designed to strengthen and 
     support families to prevent child abuse and neglect'';
       (7) in paragraph (8), by striking ``community-based, 
     prevention-focused, family resource and support programs'' 
     and inserting ``community-based and prevention-focused 
     programs and activities designed to strengthen and support 
     families to prevent child abuse and neglect'';
       (8) in paragraph (9), by striking ``community-based, 
     prevention-focused, family resource and support programs'' 
     and inserting ``community-based and prevention-focused 
     programs and activities designed to strengthen and support 
     families to prevent child abuse and neglect'';
       (9) in paragraph (10), by inserting ``(where appropriate)'' 
     after ``members'';
       (10) in paragraph (11), by striking ``prevention-focused, 
     family resource and support program'' and inserting 
     ``community-based and prevention-focused programs and 
     activities designed to strengthen and support families to 
     prevent child abuse and neglect''; and
       (11) by redesignating paragraph (13) as paragraph (12).

     SEC. 126. LOCAL PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS.

       Section 206(a) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5116e(a)) is amended--
       (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking 
     ``prevention-focused, family resource and support programs'' 
     and inserting ``and prevention-focused programs and 
     activities designed to strengthen and support families to 
     prevent child abuse and neglect'';
       (2) in paragraph (3)(B), by inserting ``voluntary home 
     visiting and'' after ``including''; and
       (3) by striking paragraph (6) and inserting the following:
       ``(6) participate with other community-based and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect in the development, operation and expansion of 
     networks where appropriate.''.

     SEC. 127. PERFORMANCE MEASURES.

       Section 207 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5116f) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``a Statewide network of 
     community-based, prevention-focused, family resource and 
     support programs'' and inserting ``community-based and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect'';
       (2) by striking paragraph (3), and inserting the following:
       ``(3) shall demonstrate that they will have addressed unmet 
     needs identified by the inventory and description of current 
     services required under section 205(3);'';
       (3) in paragraph (4),
       (A) by inserting ``and parents with disabilities,'' after 
     ``children with disabilities,''; and
       (B) by striking ``evaluation of'' the first place it 
     appears and all that follows through ``under this title'' and 
     inserting ``evaluation of community-based and prevention-
     focused programs and activities designed to strengthen and 
     support families to prevent child abuse and neglect, and in 
     the design, operation and evaluation of the networks of such 
     community-based and prevention-focused programs'';
       (4) in paragraph (5), by striking ``, prevention-focused, 
     family resource and support programs'' and inserting ``and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect'';
       (5) in paragraph (6), by striking ``Statewide network of 
     community-based, prevention-focused, family resource and 
     support programs'' and inserting ``community-based and 
     prevention-focused programs and activities designed to 
     strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect''; and
       (6) in paragraph (8), by striking ``community based, 
     prevention-focused, family resource and support programs'' 
     and inserting ``community-based and prevention-focused 
     programs and activities designed to strengthen and support 
     families to prevent child abuse and neglect''.

     SEC. 128. NATIONAL NETWORK FOR COMMUNITY-BASED FAMILY 
                   RESOURCE PROGRAMS.

       Section 208(3) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 5116g(3)) is amended by striking ``Statewide 
     networks of community-based, prevention-focused, family 
     resource and support programs'' and inserting ``community-
     based and prevention-focused programs and activities designed 
     to strengthen and support families to prevent child abuse and 
     neglect''.

     SEC. 129. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Children With Disabilities.--Section 209(1) of the 
     Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 5116h(1)) 
     is amended by striking ``given such term in section 
     602(a)(2)'' and inserting ``given the term `child with a 
     disability' in section 602(3) or `infant or toddler with a 
     disability' in section 632(5)''.
       (b) Community-Based and Prevention-Focused Programs and 
     Activities to Prevent Child Abuse and Neglect.--Section 209 
     of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (42 U.S.C. 
     5116h) is amended by striking paragraphs (3) and (4) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(3) Community-based and prevention-focused programs and 
     activities to prevent child abuse and neglect.--The term 
     `community-based and prevention-focused programs and 
     activities designed to strengthen

[[Page S2196]]

     and support families to prevent child abuse and neglect' 
     includes organizations such as family resource programs, 
     family support programs, voluntary home visiting programs, 
     respite care programs, parenting education, mutual support 
     programs, and other community programs or networks of such 
     programs that provide activities that are designed to prevent 
     or respond to child abuse and neglect.''.

     SEC. 130. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 210 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 5116i) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 210. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     title $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may 
     be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005 through 
     2008.''.

                   Subtitle C--Conforming Amendments

     SEC. 141. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

       The table of contents of the Child Abuse Prevention and 
     Treatment Act, as contained in section 1(b) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 5101 note), is amended as follows:
       (1) By striking the item relating to section 105 and 
     inserting the following:

``Sec. 105. Grants to States and public or private agencies and 
              organizations.''.

       (2) By striking the item relating to title II and inserting 
     the following:

 ``TITLE II--COMMUNITY-BASED GRANTS FOR THE PREVENTION OF CHILD ABUSE 
                             AND NEGLECT''.

       (3) By striking the item relating to section 204.

                    TITLE II--ADOPTION OPPORTUNITIES

     SEC. 201. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSE.

       Section 201 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and 
     Adoption Reform Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 5111) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking paragraphs (1) through (4) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(1) the number of children in substitute care has 
     increased by nearly 24 percent since 1994, as our Nation's 
     foster care population included more than 565,000 as of 
     September of 2001;
       ``(2) children entering foster care have complex problems 
     that require intensive services, with many such children 
     having special needs because they are born to mothers who did 
     not receive prenatal care, are born with life threatening 
     conditions or disabilities, are born addicted to alcohol or 
     other drugs, or have been exposed to infection with the 
     etiologic agent for the human immunodeficiency virus;
       ``(3) each year, thousands of children are in need of 
     placement in permanent, adoptive homes;'';
       (B) by striking paragraph (6);
       (C) by striking paragraph (7)(A) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(7)(A) currently, there are 131,000 children waiting for 
     adoption;''; and
       (D) by redesignating paragraphs (5), (7), (8), (9), and 
     (10) as paragraphs (4), (5), (6), (7), and (8) respectively; 
     and
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``, 
     including geographic barriers,'' after ``barriers''; and
       (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``a national'' and 
     inserting ``an Internet-based national''.

     SEC. 202. INFORMATION AND SERVICES.

       Section 203 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and 
     Adoption Reform Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 5113) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 203. INFORMATION AND SERVICES.'';

       (2) by striking ``Sec. 203. (a) The Secretary'' and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary'';
       (3) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by inserting ``Required Activities.--'' after ``(b)'';
       (B) in paragraph (1), by striking ``nonprofit'' each place 
     that such appears;
       (C) in paragraph (2), by striking ``nonprofit'';
       (D) in paragraph (3), by striking ``nonprofit'';
       (E) in paragraph (4), by striking ``nonprofit'';
       (F) in paragraph (6), by striking ``study the nature, 
     scope, and effects of'' and insert ``support'';
       (G) in paragraph (7), by striking ``nonprofit'';
       (H) in paragraph (9)--
       (i) by striking ``nonprofit''; and
       (ii) by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (I) in paragraph (10)--
       (i) by striking ``nonprofit''; each place that such 
     appears; and
       (ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting ``; 
     and''; and
       (J) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(11) provide (directly or by grant to or contract with 
     States, local government entities, or public or private 
     licensed child welfare or adoption agencies) for the 
     implementation of programs that are intended to increase the 
     number of older children (who are in foster care and with the 
     goal of adoption) placed in adoptive families, with a special 
     emphasis on child-specific recruitment strategies, 
     including--
       ``(A) outreach, public education, or media campaigns to 
     inform the public of the needs and numbers of older youth 
     available for adoption;
       ``(B) training of personnel in the special needs of older 
     youth and the successful strategies of child-focused, child-
     specific recruitment efforts; and
       ``(C) recruitment of prospective families for such 
     children.'';
       (4) in subsection (c)--
       (A) by striking ``(c)(1) The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(c) Services for Families Adopting Special Needs 
     Children.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary'';
       (B) by striking ``(2) Services'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) Services.--Services''; and
       (C) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by realigning the margins of subparagraphs (A) through 
     (G) accordingly;
       (ii) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (iii) in subparagraph (G), by striking the period and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (iv) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(H) day treatment; and
       ``(I) respite care.''; and
       (D) by striking ``nonprofit''; each place that such 
     appears;
       (5) in subsection (d)--
       (A) by striking ``(d)(1) The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(d) Improving Placement Rate of Children in Foster 
     Care.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary'';
       (B) by striking ``(2)(A) Each State'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(2) Applications; technical and other assistance.--
       ``(A) Applications.--Each State'';
       (C) by striking ``(B) The Secretary'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) Technical and other assistance.--The Secretary'';
       (D) in paragraph (2)(B)--
       (i) by realigning the margins of clauses (i) and (ii) 
     accordingly; and
       (ii) by striking ``nonprofit'';
       (E) by striking ``(3)(A) Payments'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(3) Payments.--
       ``(A) In general.--Payments''; and
       (F) by striking ``(B) Any payment'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) Reversion of unused funds.--Any payment''; and
       (6) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Elimination of Barriers to Adoptions Across 
     Jurisdictional Boundaries.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award grants to, or 
     enter into contracts with, States, local government entities, 
     public or private child welfare or adoption agencies, 
     adoption exchanges, or adoption family groups to carry out 
     initiatives to improve efforts to eliminate barriers to 
     placing children for adoption across jurisdictional 
     boundaries.
       ``(2) Services to supplement not supplant.--Services 
     provided under grants made under this subsection shall 
     supplement, not supplant, services provided using any other 
     funds made available for the same general purposes 
     including--
       ``(A) developing a uniform homestudy standard and protocol 
     for acceptance of homestudies between States and 
     jurisdictions;
       ``(B) developing models of financing cross-jurisdictional 
     placements;
       ``(C) expanding the capacity of all adoption exchanges to 
     serve increasing numbers of children;
       ``(D) developing training materials and training social 
     workers on preparing and moving children across State lines; 
     and
       ``(E) developing and supporting initiative models for 
     networking among agencies, adoption exchanges, and parent 
     support groups across jurisdictional boundaries.''.

     SEC. 203. STUDY OF ADOPTION PLACEMENTS.

       Section 204 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and 
     Adoption Reform Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 5114) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``The'' and inserting ``(a) In General.--
     The'';
       (2) by striking ``of this Act'' and inserting ``of the 
     Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003'';
       (3) by striking ``to determine the nature'' and inserting 
     ``to determine--
       ``(1) the nature'';
       (4) by striking ``which are not licensed'' and all that 
     follows through ``entity'';''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) how interstate placements are being financed across 
     State lines;
       ``(3) recommendations on best practice models for both 
     interstate and intrastate adoptions; and
       ``(4) how State policies in defining special needs children 
     differentiate or group similar categories of children.''.

     SEC. 204. STUDIES ON SUCCESSFUL ADOPTIONS.

       Section 204 of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment and 
     Adoption Reform Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 5114) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Dynamics of Successful Adoption.--The Secretary shall 
     conduct research (directly or by grant to, or contract with, 
     public or private nonprofit research agencies or 
     organizations) about adoption outcomes and the factors 
     affecting those outcomes. The Secretary shall submit a report 
     containing the results of such research to the appropriate 
     committees of the Congress not later than the date that is 36 
     months after the date of the enactment of the Keeping 
     Children and Families Safe Act of 2003.

[[Page S2197]]

       ``(c) Interjurisdictional Adoption.--Not later than 1 year 
     after the date of the enactment of the Keeping Children and 
     Families Safe Act of 2003, the Secretary, in consultation 
     with the Comptroller General, shall submit to the appropriate 
     committees of the Congress a report that contains 
     recommendations for an action plan to facilitate the 
     interjurisdictional adoption of foster children.''.

     SEC. 205. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 205(a) of the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment 
     and Adoption Reform Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. 5115(a)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``There are authorized to be appropriated $40,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal 
     years 2005 through 2008 to carry out programs and activities 
     authorized under this subtitle.''.

                TITLE III--ABANDONED INFANTS ASSISTANCE

     SEC. 301. FINDINGS.

       Section 2 of the Abandoned Infants Assistance Act of 1988 
     (42 U.S.C. 670 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking paragraph (1);
       (2) in paragraph (2)--
       (A) by inserting ``studies indicate that a number of 
     factors contribute to'' before ``the inability of'';
       (B) by inserting ``some'' after ``inability of'';
       (C) by striking ``who abuse drugs''; and
       (D) by striking ``care for such infants'' and inserting 
     ``care for their infants'';
       (3) by amending paragraph (5) to read as follows:
       ``(5) appropriate training is needed for personnel working 
     with infants and young children with life-threatening 
     conditions and other special needs, including those who are 
     infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (commonly 
     known as `HIV'), those who have acquired immune deficiency 
     syndrome (commonly known as `AIDS'), and those who have been 
     exposed to dangerous drugs;'';
       (4) by striking paragraphs (6) and (7);
       (5) in paragraph (8)--
       (A) by striking ``such infants and young children'' and 
     inserting ``infants and young children who are abandoned in 
     hospitals''; and
       (B) by inserting ``by parents abusing drugs,'' after 
     ``deficiency syndrome,'';
       (6) in paragraph (9), by striking ``comprehensive 
     services'' and all that follows through the semicolon at the 
     end and inserting ``comprehensive support services for such 
     infants and young children and their families and services to 
     prevent the abandonment of such infants and young children, 
     including foster care services, case management services, 
     family support services, respite and crisis intervention 
     services, counseling services, and group residential home 
     services;'';
       (7) by striking paragraph (11);
       (8) by redesignating paragraphs (2), (3), (4), (5), (8), 
     (9), and (10) as paragraphs (1) through (7), respectively; 
     and
       (9) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(8) private, Federal, State, and local resources should 
     be coordinated to establish and maintain services described 
     in paragraph (7) and to ensure the optimal use of all such 
     resources.''.

     SEC. 302. ESTABLISHMENT OF LOCAL PROJECTS.

       Section 101 of the Abandoned Infants Assistance Act of 1988 
     (42 U.S.C. 670 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking the section heading and inserting the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 101. ESTABLISHMENT OF LOCAL PROJECTS.'';

     and
       (2) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Priority in Provision of Services.--The Secretary may 
     not make a grant under subsection (a) unless the applicant 
     for the grant agrees to give priority to abandoned infants 
     and young children who--
       ``(1) are infected with, or have been perinatally exposed 
     to, the human immunodeficiency virus, or have a life-
     threatening illness or other special medical need; or
       ``(2) have been perinatally exposed to a dangerous drug.''.

     SEC. 303. EVALUATIONS, STUDY, AND REPORTS BY SECRETARY.

       Section 102 of the Abandoned Infants Assistance Act of 1988 
     (42 U.S.C. 670 note) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 102. EVALUATIONS, STUDY, AND REPORTS BY SECRETARY.

       ``(a) Evaluations of Local Programs.--The Secretary shall, 
     directly or through contracts with public and nonprofit 
     private entities, provide for evaluations of projects carried 
     out under section 101 and for the dissemination of 
     information developed as a result of such projects.
       ``(b) Study and Report on Number of Abandoned Infants and 
     Young Children.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study for 
     the purpose of determining--
       ``(A) an estimate of the annual number of infants and young 
     children relinquished, abandoned, or found deceased in the 
     United States and the number of such infants and young 
     children who are infants and young children described in 
     section 101(b);
       ``(B) an estimate of the annual number of infants and young 
     children who are victims of homicide;
       ``(C) characteristics and demographics of parents who have 
     abandoned an infant within 1 year of the infant's birth; and
       ``(D) an estimate of the annual costs incurred by the 
     Federal Government and by State and local governments in 
     providing housing and care for abandoned infants and young 
     children.
       ``(2) Deadline.--Not later than 36 months after the date of 
     enactment of the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 
     2003, the Secretary shall complete the study required under 
     paragraph (1) and submit to Congress a report describing the 
     findings made as a result of the study.
       ``(c) Evaluation.--The Secretary shall evaluate and report 
     on effective methods of intervening before the abandonment of 
     an infant or young child so as to prevent such abandonments, 
     and effective methods for responding to the needs of 
     abandoned infants and young children.''.

     SEC. 304. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 104 of the Abandoned Infants 
     Assistance Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 670 note) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:
       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Authorization.--For the purpose of carrying out this 
     Act, there are authorized to be appropriated $45,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be necessary for fiscal 
     years 2005 through 2008.
       ``(2) Limitation.--Not more than 5 percent of the amounts 
     appropriated under paragraph (1) for any fiscal year may be 
     obligated for carrying out section 102(a).'';
       (2) by striking subsection (b);
       (3) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by inserting ``Authorization.--'' after ``(1)'' the 
     first place it appears; and
       (ii) by striking ``this title'' and inserting ``this Act''; 
     and
       (B) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) by inserting ``Limitation.--'' after ``(2)''; and
       (ii) by striking ``fiscal year 1991.'' and inserting 
     ``fiscal year 2003.''; and
       (4) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections 
     (b) and (c), respectively.
       (b) Redesignation.--The Abandoned Infants Assistance Act of 
     1988 (42 U.S.C. 670 note) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 104 as section 302; and
       (2) by moving that section 302 to the end of that Act.

     SEC. 305. DEFINITIONS.

       (a) In General.--Section 301 of the Abandoned Infants 
     Assistance Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 670 note) is amended to 
     read as follows:

     ``SEC. 301. DEFINITIONS.

       ``In this Act:
       ``(1) Abandoned; abandonment.--The terms `abandoned' and 
     `abandonment', used with respect to infants and young 
     children, mean that the infants and young children are 
     medically cleared for discharge from acute-care hospital 
     settings, but remain hospitalized because of a lack of 
     appropriate out-of-hospital placement alternatives.
       ``(2) Acquired immune deficiency syndrome.--The term 
     `acquired immune deficiency syndrome' includes infection with 
     the etiologic agent for such syndrome, any condition 
     indicating that an individual is infected with such etiologic 
     agent, and any condition arising from such etiologic agent.
       ``(3) Dangerous drug.--The term `dangerous drug' means a 
     controlled substance, as defined in section 102 of the 
     Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802).
       ``(4) Natural family.--The term `natural family' shall be 
     broadly interpreted to include natural parents, grandparents, 
     family members, guardians, children residing in the 
     household, and individuals residing in the household on a 
     continuing basis who are in a care-giving situation, with 
     respect to infants and young children covered under this Act.
       ``(5) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary 
     of Health and Human Services.''.
       (b) Repeal.--Section 103 of the Abandoned Infants 
     Assistance Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. 670 note) is repealed.

         TITLE IV--FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND SERVICES ACT

     SEC. 401. STATE DEMONSTRATION GRANTS.

       (a) Underserved Populations.--Section 303(a)(2)(C) of the 
     Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (42 U.S.C. 
     10402(a)(2)(C)) is amended by striking ``underserved 
     populations,'' and all that follows and inserting the 
     following: ``underserved populations, as defined in section 
     2007 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 
     1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796gg-2);''.
       (b) Report.--Section 303(a) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     10402(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) Upon completion of the activities funded by a grant 
     under this title, the State shall submit to the Secretary a 
     report that contains a description of the activities carried 
     out under paragraph (2)(B)(i).''.
       (c) Children Who Witness Domestic Violence.--Section 303 of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 10402) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating subsections (c) through (f) as 
     subsections (d) through (g), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
       ``(c) For a fiscal year described in section 310(a)(2), the 
     Secretary shall use funds made available under that section 
     to make grants, on a competitive basis, to eligible entities 
     for projects designed to address the needs of children who 
     witness domestic violence, to--
       ``(1) provide direct services for children who witness 
     domestic violence;

[[Page S2198]]

       ``(2) provide for training for and collaboration among 
     child welfare agencies, domestic violence victim service 
     providers, courts, law enforcement, and other entities; and
       ``(3) provide for multisystem interventions for children 
     who witness domestic violence.''.

     SEC. 402. SECRETARIAL RESPONSIBILITIES.

       Section 305(a) of the Family Violence Prevention and 
     Services Act (42 U.S.C. 10404(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``an employee'' and inserting ``1 or more 
     employees'';
       (2) by striking ``of this title.'' and inserting ``of this 
     title, including carrying out evaluation and monitoring under 
     this title.''; and
       (3) by striking ``The individual'' and inserting ``Any 
     individual''.

     SEC. 403. EVALUATION.

       Section 306 of the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 10405) is amended in the first sentence by 
     striking ``Not later than two years after the date on which 
     funds are obligated under section 303(a) for the first time 
     after the date of the enactment of this title, and every two 
     years thereafter,'' and inserting ``Every 2 years,''.

     SEC. 404. INFORMATION AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CENTERS.

       Section 308 of the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 10407) is amended by striking subsection (g).

     SEC. 405. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) General Authorization.--Section 310(a) of the Family 
     Violence Prevention and Services Act (42 U.S.C. 10409(a)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(a) In General.--
       ``(1) Authorization.--There are authorized to be 
     appropriated to carry out sections 303 through 311, 
     $175,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2008.
       ``(2) Projects to address needs of children who witness 
     domestic violence.--For a fiscal year in which the amounts 
     appropriated under paragraph (1) exceed $150,000,000, the 
     Secretary shall reserve and make available 50 percent of the 
     excess to carry out section 303(c).''.
       (b) Allocations for Other Programs.--Subsections (b), (c), 
     and (d) of section 310 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 10409) are 
     amended by inserting ``(and not reserved under subsection 
     (a)(2))'' after ``each fiscal year''.
       (c) Grants for State Domestic Violence Coalitions.--Section 
     311(g) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 10410(g)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(g) Funding.--Of the amount appropriated under section 
     310(a) for a fiscal year (and not reserved under section 
     310(a)(2)), not less than 10 percent of such amount shall be 
     made available to award grants under this section.''.

     SEC. 406. GRANTS FOR STATE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COALITIONS.

       Section 311 of the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 10410) is amended by striking subsection (h).

     SEC. 407. EVALUATION AND MONITORING.

       Section 312 of the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 10412) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(c) Of the amount appropriated under section 310(a) for 
     each fiscal year (and not reserved under section 310(a)(2)), 
     not more than 2.5 percent shall be used by the Secretary for 
     evaluation, monitoring, and other administrative costs under 
     this title.''.

     SEC. 408. FAMILY MEMBER ABUSE INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION 
                   PROJECT.

       Section 313 of the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 10413) is repealed.

     SEC. 409. MODEL STATE LEADERSHIP GRANTS.

       Section 315 of the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 10415) is repealed.

     SEC. 410. NATIONAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HOTLINE GRANT.

       (a) Duration.--Section 316(b) of the Family Violence 
     Prevention and Services Act (42 U.S.C. 10416(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``A grant'' and inserting the following:
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), a 
     grant''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Extension.--The Secretary may extend the duration of 
     a grant under this section beyond the period described in 
     paragraph (1) if, prior to such extension--
       ``(A) the entity prepares and submits to the Secretary a 
     report that evaluates the effectiveness of the use of amounts 
     received under the grant for the period described in 
     paragraph (1) and contains any other information the 
     Secretary may prescribe; and
       ``(B) the report and other appropriate criteria indicate 
     that the entity is successfully operating the hotline in 
     accordance with subsection (a).''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 316(f) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 10416(f)) is repealed.

     SEC. 411. YOUTH EDUCATION AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

       Section 317 of the Family Violence Prevention and Services 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 10417) is repealed.

     SEC. 412. NATIONAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTER NETWORK.

       The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act is amended 
     by inserting after section 316 (42 U.S.C. 10416) the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 317. NATIONAL DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTER NETWORK.

       ``(a) In General.--For a year in which the Secretary makes 
     an amount available under subsection (g)(2), the Secretary 
     shall award a grant to a nonprofit organization to establish 
     and operate a highly secure Internet website (referred to in 
     this section as the `website') that shall--
       ``(1) link, to the greatest extent possible, entities 
     consisting of the entity providing the national domestic 
     violence hotline, participating domestic violence shelters in 
     the United States, State and local domestic violence 
     agencies, and other domestic violence organization, so that 
     such entities will be able to connect a victim of domestic 
     violence to the most safe, appropriate, and convenient 
     domestic violence shelter; and
       ``(2) contain, to the maximum extent practicable, 
     continuously updated information concerning the availability 
     of services and space in domestic violence shelters across 
     the United States.
       ``(b) Eligible Entities.--To be eligible to receive a grant 
     under this section, a nonprofit organization shall submit to 
     the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, 
     and containing such information as the Secretary may require. 
     The application shall--
       ``(1) demonstrate the experience of the applicant in 
     successfully developing and managing a technology-based 
     network of domestic violence shelters;
       ``(2) demonstrate a record of success of the applicant in 
     meeting the needs of domestic violence victims and their 
     families; and
       ``(3) include a certification that the applicant will--
       ``(A) implement a high level security system to ensure the 
     confidentiality of the website;
       ``(B) establish, within 5 years, a website that links the 
     entities described in subsection (a)(1);
       ``(C) consult with the entities described in subsection 
     (a)(1) in developing and implementing the website and 
     providing Internet connections; and
       ``(D) otherwise comply with the requirements of this 
     section.
       ``(c) Use of Grant Award.--The recipient of a grant award 
     under this section shall--
       ``(1) collaborate with officials of the Department of 
     Health and Human Services in a manner determined to be 
     appropriate by the Secretary;
       ``(2) collaborate with the entity providing the national 
     domestic violence hotline in developing and implementing the 
     network;
       ``(3) ensure that the website is continuously updated and 
     highly secure;
       ``(4) ensure that the website provides information 
     describing the services of each domestic violence shelter to 
     which the website is linked, including information for 
     individuals with limited English proficiency and information 
     concerning access to medical care, social services, 
     transportation, services for children, and other relevant 
     services;
       ``(5) ensure that the website provides up-to-the-minute 
     information on available bed space in domestic violence 
     shelters across the United States, to the maximum extent 
     practicable;
       ``(6) provide training to the staff of the hotline and to 
     staff of the other entities described in subsection (a)(1) 
     regarding how to use the website to best meet the needs of 
     callers;
       ``(7) provide Internet access, and hardware in necessary 
     cases, to domestic violence shelters in the United States 
     that do not have the appropriate technology for such access, 
     to the maximum extent practicable; and
       ``(8) ensure that after the third year of the website 
     project, the recipient will develop a plan to expand the 
     sources of funding for the website to include funding from 
     public and private entities, although nothing in this 
     paragraph shall preclude a grant recipient under this section 
     from raising funds from other sources at any time during the 
     5-year grant period.
       ``(d) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall be 
     construed to require any shelter or service provider, whether 
     public or private, to be linked to the website or to provide 
     information to the recipient of the grant award or to the 
     website.
       ``(e) Duration of Grant.--The term of a grant awarded under 
     this section shall be 5 years.
       ``(f) Technical Assistance and Oversight.--The Secretary 
     shall--
       ``(1) provide technical assistance, if requested, on 
     developing and managing the website; and
       ``(2) have access to, and monitor, the website.
       ``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out section 316 and this section, $5,000,000 for 
     fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be necessary for each 
     of fiscal years 2005 through 2008.
       ``(2) Conditions on appropriations.--Notwithstanding 
     paragraph (1), the Secretary shall make available a portion 
     of the amounts appropriated under paragraph (1) to carry out 
     this section only for any fiscal year for which the amounts 
     appropriated under paragraph (1) exceed $3,000,000.
       ``(3) Administrative costs.--Of the amount made available 
     to carry out this section for a fiscal year the Secretary may 
     not use more than 2 percent for administrative costs 
     associated with the grant program carried out under this 
     section, of which not more than 5 percent shall be used to 
     assist the entity providing the national domestic violence 
     hotline to participate in the establishment of the website.
       ``(4) Availability.--Funds appropriated under paragraph (1) 
     shall remain available until expended.''.

[[Page S2199]]

     SEC. 412. DEMONSTRATION GRANTS FOR COMMUNITY INITIATIVES.

       (a) In General.--Section 318(h) of the Family Violence 
     Prevention and Services Act (42 U.S.C. 10418(h)) is amended 
     to read as follows:
       ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section $6,000,000 for 
     each of fiscal years 2004 through 2008.''.
       (b) Regulations.--Section 318 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 10418) 
     is amended by striking subsection (i).

     SEC. 414. TRANSITIONAL HOUSING ASSISTANCE.

       Section 319(f) of the Family Violence Prevention and 
     Services Act (42 U.S.C. 10419(f)) is amended by striking 
     ``fiscal year 2001'' and inserting ``each of fiscal years 
     2004 through 2008''.

     SEC. 415. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

       The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (42 U.S.C. 
     10401 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 302(1) (42 U.S.C. 10401(1)) by striking 
     ``demonstrate the effectiveness of assisting'' and inserting 
     ``assist'';
       (2) in section 303(a) (42 U.S.C. 10402(a))--
       (A) in paragraph (2)--
       (i) in subparagraph (C), by striking ``State domestic 
     violence coalitions knowledgeable individuals and interested 
     organizations'' and inserting ``State domestic violence 
     coalitions, knowledgeable individuals, and interested 
     organizations''; and
       (ii) in subparagraph (F), by adding ``and'' at the end; and
       (B) by aligning the margins of paragraph (4) with the 
     margins of paragraph (3);
       (3) in section 303(g) (as so redesignated)--
       (A) in the first sentence, by striking ``309(4)'' and 
     inserting ``320''; and
       (B) in the second sentence, by striking ``309(5)(A)'' and 
     inserting ``320(5)(A)'';
       (4) in section 305(b)(2)(A) (42 U.S.C. 10404(b)(2)(A)) by 
     striking ``provide for research, and into'' and inserting 
     ``provide for research into'';
       (5) by redesignating section 309 as section 320 and moving 
     that section to the end of the Act; and
       (6) in section 311(a) (42 U.S.C. 10410(a))--
       (A) in paragraph (2)(K), by striking ``other criminal 
     justice professionals,;'' and inserting ``other criminal 
     justice professionals;'' and
       (B) in paragraph (3)--
       (i) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``family law judges,,'' and inserting ``family law judges,'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (D), by inserting ``, criminal court 
     judges,'' after ``family law judges''; and
       (iii) in subparagraph (H), by striking ``supervised 
     visitations that do not endanger victims and their children'' 
     and inserting ``supervised visitations or denial of 
     visitation to protect against danger to victims or their 
     children''.

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues in 
introducing the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003. This 
Act continues our Federal commitment to ensuring that the Nation's most 
vulnerable children are protected and safe.
  Recent cases of abuse and neglect have made national headlines as 
local authorities have failed to identify abused children. These 
failures have led to tragic consequences--the deaths of innocent and 
unprotected children.
  Clearly, we must do better--at the national, State, and local levels. 
And the bill we introduce today will enhance the Federal partnership 
with local officials to bring greater protection to our children.
  Since 1974, the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, or CAPTA, 
has been a great support in reaching the nearly 900,000 children who 
suffer abuse and neglect each year. This year's bipartisan 
reauthorization of CAPTA will continue and expand that support through 
FY 2008, and extend CAPTA's related programs, including the Abandoned 
Infants Assistance Act, the Adoption Opportunities Act, and the Family 
Violence Prevention and Services Act.
  Child abuse and neglect continues to be a serious and daunting 
problem in our nation. In local communities, child protective services 
agencies bear the responsibility of receiving and investigating reports 
of child abuse and neglect. Each year those agencies respond to nearly 
3 million reports of abuse. It is a tremendous challenge, and 
caseworkers in local agencies perform an admirable task worthy of our 
thanks.
  But despite the hard work of child protective services, nearly half 
of all children in substantiated cases of abuse receive no follow-up 
services or support. In 2000, over 900 children under the age of 6 died 
of abuse and neglect. Those children in desperate circumstances need 
and deserve our help, and we must do better.
  The Keeping Children and Families Safe Act will bring us closer 
toward our goal of responding more effectively to child abuse and 
neglect. Our bipartisan bill encourages better training and 
qualifications for child abuse caseworkers, creates linkages to better 
facilitate referrals for neglected children, and coordinates best 
practices to improve systems that currently serve and protect children.
  Actions to prevent and address child abuse and neglect must be 
strengthened and expanded. This bill will improve current systems of 
child abuse treatment by coordinating information on best practices 
among child protective services agencies through the National Child 
Abuse Clearinghouse, and disseminating those practices that hold 
promise to improve systems. The bill will also ensure that local 
citizen review panels oversee, review, and bolster the practices of 
child protective services. Access to technical assistance and grants 
will also be broadened to private entities working to prevent and treat 
child abuse.
  The identification and treatment of abused children cannot be 
improved without better preparation of those responsible for 
investigating abuse and neglect. By improving the training, retention, 
and supervision of child protective caseworkers, the bill will ensure 
that children receive the help they need. New training will help 
caseworkers become familiar with their legal duties and receive 
guidance on how to best work with families. Training will also be 
provided to protect the personal safety of caseworkers as they enter 
homes to investigate allegations of abuse.
  More must also be done to ensure that abused children receive ongoing 
support and services. This bill will encourage states to adopt a 
comprehensive approach to treating and preventing abuse by linking 
child protective services and education, health, mental health, and 
judicial systems to more effectively follow-up with support and 
services to abused and neglected children. The bill will also promote 
partnerships between public agencies and community-based organizations 
to support child abuse prevention and treatment.
  I am pleased that the Keeping Children and Families Safe Act 
continues the legacy of the late Senator Wellstone in combating 
domestic violence and addressing its impact on children. It is 
estimated that 10 million children witness physical abuse between their 
parents each year, damaging their emotional and physical well being, 
and causing difficulties later in life.
  Under this Act, new grants will be awarded, once appropriations for 
the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act reach $150 million, to 
address the physical and emotional needs of children who witness 
violence in their homes. Those funds will support direct services and 
interventions for children who witness domestic violence, bringing 
together child welfare agencies, courts, law enforcement, and other 
appropriate entities.
  This Act also supports a new electronic network to connect victims of 
domestic violence and support organizations and networks in local 
communities. This network will enhance the current national domestic 
violence hotline, which serves as a vital resource for victims of 
domestic abuse 24-hours-a-day, 365 days a year. The hotline currently 
provides support and assistance to 300 to 400 callers a day.
  We must do more to help children and their families overcome the 
harmful effects of abuse, neglect, and violence. The Keeping Children 
and Families Safe Act of 2003 is a step in the right direction toward 
that goal, and I urge my colleagues to support this important 
legislation.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senator Gregg, 
Senator Kennedy, and Senator Alexander in introducing the Keeping 
Children and Families Safe Act of 2003.
  The bill we are introducing today would strengthen efforts to prevent 
child abuse and neglect, promote increased sharing of information and 
partnerships between child protective services and education, health, 
and juvenile justice systems, and encourage a variety of new training 
programs to improve child protection, particularly cross-training in 
recognizing domestic violence and substance abuse in addition to child 
abuse detection and protection training.
  The Keeping Children and Families Safe Act of 2003 renews grants to 
States to improve child protection systems and increases to $200 
million the

[[Page S2200]]

authorization for child abuse investigations, training of child 
protection service, CPS, workers, and community child abuse prevention 
programs. For States to receive funding, they must meet several new 
requirements: have triage procedures to provide appropriate referrals 
of a child ``not at risk of imminent harm'' to a community organization 
or for voluntary preventive services; have policies in place to address 
the needs of infants who are born and identified as having been 
physically affected by prenatal exposure to illegal drugs, which must 
include a safe plan of care for the child; have policies for improved 
training, retention, and supervision of caseworkers; and require 
criminal background record checks for prospective foster and adoptive 
parents and all other adults living in the household, not later than 2 
years after the law's enactment.
  Child abuse and neglect continue to be significant problems in the 
United States.
  About 3 million referrals concerning the welfare of about 5 million 
children were made to Child Protection Services, CPS, agencies 
throughout the Nation in 2000. Of these referrals, about two-thirds, 62 
percent, were ``screened-in'' for further assessment and investigation. 
Professionals, including teachers, law enforcement officers, social 
service workers, and physicians made more than half, 56 percent, of the 
screened-in reports. About 879,000 children were found to be victims of 
child maltreatment. About two-thirds, 63 percent, suffered neglect, 
including medical neglect; 19 percent were physically abused; 10 
percent were sexually abused; and 8 percent were emotionally 
maltreated.
  Many of these children fail to receive adequate protection and 
services. Nearly half, 45 percent, of these children failed to receive 
services.
  The most tragic consequence of child maltreatment is death. The April 
maltreatment summary data released by the Department of Health and 
Human Services, HHS, shows that about 1,200 children died of abuse and 
neglect in 2000. Children younger than six years of age accounted for 
85 percent of child fatalities and children younger than one year of 
age accounted for 44 percent of child fatalities.
  Child abuse is not a new phenomenon. For more than a decade, numerous 
reports have called attention to the tragic abuse and neglect of 
children and the inadequacy of our Child Protection Services, CPS, 
systems to protect our children.
  In 1990, the U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect concluded 
that ``child abuse and neglect is a national emergency.'' In 1995, the 
U.S. Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect reported that ``State 
and local CPS caseworkers are often overextended and cannot adequately 
function under their current caseloads.'' The report also stated that, 
``in many jurisdictions, caseloads are so high that CPS response is 
limited to taking the complaint call, making a single visit to the 
home, and deciding whether or not the complaint is valid, often without 
any subsequent monitoring of the family.''
  A 1997 General Accounting Office, GAO, report found, ``the CPS system 
is in crisis, plagued by difficult problems, such as growing caseloads, 
increasingly complex social problems and underlying child maltreatment, 
and ongoing systemic weaknesses in day-to-day operations.'' According 
to GAO, CPS weaknesses include ``difficulty in maintaining a skilled 
workforce; the inability to consistently follow key policies and 
procedures designed to protect children; developing useful case data 
and record-keeping systems, such as automated case management; and 
establishing good working relationships with the courts.''
  According to the May 2001 ``Report from the Child Welfare Workforce 
Survey: State and County Data and Findings'' conducted by the American 
Public Human Services Association, APHSA, the Child Welfare League of 
America, CWLA, and the Alliance for Children and Families, annual staff 
turnover is high and morale is low among CPS workers. The report found 
that CPS workers had an annual turnover rate of 22 percent, 76 percent 
higher than the turnover rate for total agency staff. The 
``preventable'' turnover rate was 67 percent, or two-thirds higher than 
the rate for all other direct service workers and total agency staff. 
In some States, 75 percent or more of staff turnovers were preventable.
  States rated a number of retention issues as highly problematic. In 
descending order they are: workloads that are too high and/or 
demanding; caseloads that are too high; too much worker time spent on 
travel, paperwork, courts, and meetings; workers not feeling valued by 
the agency; low salaries; supervision problems; and insufficient 
resources for families and children.
  To prevent turnover and retain quality CPS staff, some States have 
begun to increase in-service training, increase education 
opportunities, increase supervisory training, increase or improve 
orientation, increase worker safety, and offer flex-time or changes in 
office hours. Most States, however, continue to grapple with staff 
turnover and training issues.
  Continued public criticism of CPS efforts, continued frustration by 
CPS staff and child welfare workers, and continued abuse and neglect, 
and death, of our nation's children, served as the backdrop as we put 
together the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, CAPTA, 
reauthorization bill this year.
  The Child Protection System mission must focus on the safety of 
children. To ensure that the system works as intended, CPS needs to be 
appropriately staffed. The staff need to receive appropriate training 
and cross-training to better recognize substance abuse and domestic 
violence problems. The bill we are introducing today encourages triage 
approaches and differential response systems so that those reports 
where children are most at-risk of imminent harm can be prioritized. 
The bill specifically emphasizes collaborations in communities between 
CPS, health agencies, including mental health agencies, schools, and 
community-based groups to help strengthen families and provide better 
protection for children. The bill provides grants for prevention 
programs and activities to prevent child abuse and neglect for families 
at-risk to improve the likelihood that a child will grow up in a home 
without violence, abuse, or neglect.
  Beyond the CAPTA title of this legislation, our bill reauthorizes the 
Family Violence Prevention and Services Act, including new efforts to 
address the needs of children who witness domestic violence, the 
Adoption Opportunities Act, and the Abandoned Infants Assistance Act.
  Child protection ought not be a partisan issue. This bill will help 
ensure that it is not. I want to commend and thank my co-authors--
Chairman Gregg, Senator Kennedy and Senator Alexander--for their 
efforts to craft a bipartisan initiative that can help to prevent and 
alleviate suffering among our Nation's children. I urge my colleagues 
to join us in supporting this bill and to strengthen child protection 
laws early this year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MIKULSKI (for herself, Mr. Johnson, Mrs. Murray, Ms. 
        Stabenow, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Inouye, and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 343. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
permit direct payment under the medicare program for clinical social 
worker services provided to residents of skilled nursing facilities; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Clinical 
Social Work Medicare Equity Act of 2003.'' I am proud to sponsor this 
legislation that will include clinical social workers among other 
mental health providers that are exempted from the Medicare Part B 
Prospective Payment System. This bill will ensure that clinical social 
workers can receive Medicare reimbursements for the mental health 
services they provide in skilled nursing facilities.
  Since my first days in Congress, I have been fighting to protect and 
strengthen the safety for our Nation's seniors. Making sure that 
seniors have access to quality, affordable mental health care is an 
important part of this fight. I know that millions of seniors do not 
have access to, or are not receiving, the mental health services they 
need. For example, depression affects nearly 6 million seniors, but 
only one-tenth ever get treated. This is unacceptable. Clinical social 
workers

[[Page S2201]]

may also be the only mental health providers in some rural areas. 
Protecting seniors' access to clinical social workers can help make 
sure that our most vulnerable citizens get the quality, affordable 
mental health care they need.
  Clinical social workers, much like psychologists and psychiatrists, 
treat and diagnose mental illnesses. In fact, clinical social workers 
are the primary mental health providers for nursing home residents. But 
unlike other mental health providers, clinical social workers cannot 
bill directly for the important services they provide to their 
patients. This bill will correct this inequity and make sure clinical 
social workers get the payments and respect they deserve.
  Before the Balanced Budget Act of 1997, clinical social workers 
billed Medicare Part B directly for mental health services provided in 
nursing facilities to each patient they served. Under the Prospective 
Payment System, services provided by clinical social workers are 
lumped, or ``bundled,'' along with the services of other health care 
providers for the purposes of billing and payments. Psychologists and 
psychiatrists, who provide similar counseling, were exempted from this 
system and continue to bill Medicare directly. This bill would exempt 
clinical social workers, like their mental health colleagues, from the 
Prospective Payment System, and would make sure that clinical social 
workers are paid for the services they provide to patients in skilled 
nursing facilities. The Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits 
Improvement and Protection Act addressed some of these concerns, but 
this legislation would remove the final barrier to ensuring that 
clinical social workers are treated fairly and equitably for the care 
they provide.
  This bill is about more than paperwork and payment procedures. This 
bill is about equal access to Medicare payments for the equal and 
important work done by clinical social workers. It is also about making 
sure our Nation's most vulnerable citizens have access to quality, 
affordable mental health care. Without clinical social workers, many 
nursing home residents may never get the counseling they need when 
faced with a life threatening illness or the loss of a loved one. I 
think we can do better by our nation's seniors, and I'm fighting to 
make sure we do.
  The Clinical Social Work Medicare Equity Act of 2003 is strongly 
supported by the National Association of Social Workers. I ask 
unanimous consent that a letter of endorsement from the National 
Association of Social Workers be printed in the Record. I also want to 
thank Senators Johnson, Murray, Stabenow, Corzine, Inouye, and Bingaman 
for their cosponsorship of this bill. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to enact this important legislation.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                              National Association


                                            of Social Workers,

                                Washington, DC, February 10, 2003.
     Hon. Barbara A. Mikulski,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Mikulski: I am writing on behalf of the 
     National Association of Social Workers (NASW), the largest 
     professional social work organization with nearly 150,000 
     members nationwide. NASW promotes, develops, and protects the 
     effective practice of social work and social workers. NASW 
     also seeks to enhance the well being of individuals, 
     families, and communities through its work, service, and 
     advocacy.
       NASW strongly supports the Clinical Social Work Medicare 
     Equity Act of 2003 which will end the unfair treatment of 
     clinical social workers under the Medicare Part B Prospective 
     Payment System (PPS) for Skilled Nursing Facilities (SNFs).
       Section 4432 of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 authorized 
     the creation of the PPS, under which the cost of a variety of 
     daily services provided to SNF patients is bundled into a 
     single amount. Prior to PPS, a separate Medicare Part B claim 
     was filed by the provider for each individual service 
     rendered to a patient. Congress made this change in an 
     attempt to captitate the rapidly rising costs of additional 
     patient services delivered by Medicare providers to SNF 
     patients, with the precise target being physical, 
     occupational, and speech-language therapy services. However, 
     Congress recognized that some services, such as mental health 
     and anesthesia, are best provided on an individual basis 
     rather than as part of the bundle of services. Thus, the 
     following types of providers are specifically excluded from 
     the PPS: physicians, clinical psychologists, certified nurse-
     midwives, and certified registered nurse anesthetists. 
     Unfortunately, due to an unintentional oversight during the 
     drafting process, clinical social workers were not listed 
     among the aforementioned providers in the legislation.
       In 1996, Department of Health and Human Services Inspector 
     General June Gibbs Brown published a report entitled ``Mental 
     Health Services in Nursing Facilities''. The purpose of the 
     report was to describe the types of mental health services 
     provided in nursing facilities and identify potential 
     vulnerabilities in the mental health services covered by 
     Medicare. One critical funding of the report was 70% of 
     nursing home respondents stated that permitting clinical 
     social workers and clinical psychologists to bill 
     independently had a beneficial effect on the provision of 
     mental health services in nursing facilities. The Clinical 
     Social Work Medicare Equity will maintain this beneficial 
     effect on SNF patients by ensuring the continuation of direct 
     Medicare billing by clinical social workers for mental health 
     services rendered to SNF patients.
       Your efforts on behalf of mental health patients and 
     professionals nationwide are greatly appreciated by our 
     members. We thank you for your strong interest in and 
     commitment to this important issue as demonstrated by your 
     sponsorship of the Clinical Social Work Medicare Equity Act.
       Please do not hesitate to contact Francesca Fierro O'Reilly 
     of my staff at 202-408-8600 x336 should you require anything 
     further. NASW looks forward to working with you on this and 
     future issues of mutual concern.
           Sincerely,
                                               Elizabeth J. Clark,
                               PhD, ACSW, MPH, Executive Director.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mr. Inouye):
  S. 344. A bill expressing the policy of the United States regarding 
the United States relationship with Native Hawaiians and to provide a 
process for the recognition by the United States of the Native Hawaiian 
governing entity, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian 
Affairs.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill with my 
friend and colleague, the senior Senator from Hawaii, Mr. Inouye, which 
would clarify the political relationship between Native Hawaiians and 
the United States. This measure would extend the Federal policy of 
self-determination and self-governance to Hawaii's indigenous, native 
peoples--Native Hawaiians, by providing a process for the reorganized 
Native Hawaiian governing entity to be recognized for the purposes of a 
government-to-government relationship with the United States.
  The bill we introduce today is identical to legislation that was 
reported by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs during the 107th 
Congress. This bill does three things. First if provides a process for 
Federal recognition of the Native Hawaiian governing entity. Second, it 
establishes an office within the Department of the Interior to focus on 
Native Hawaiian issues and to serve as a liaison between Native 
Hawaiians and the Federal Government. Finally, it establishes an 
interagency coordinating group to be composed of representatives of 
federal agencies which administer programs and implement policies 
impacting Native Hawaiians.
  While Federal policies towards Native Hawaiians have paralleled that 
of Native American Indians and Alaska Natives, the Federal policy of 
self-determination and self-governance has not yet been extended to 
Native Hawaiians. This measure extends this policy to Native Hawaiians, 
thus furthering the process of reconciliation between Native Hawaiians 
and the United States, and providing parity in the Federal Government's 
interactions with American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native 
Hawaiians.
  This measure does not establish entitlements or special treatment for 
Native Hawaiians based on race. This measure focuses on the political 
relationship afforded to Native Hawaiians based on the United States' 
recognition of Native Hawaiians as the aboriginal, indigenous peoples 
of Hawaii. While the United States' history with its indigenous peoples 
has been dismal, in recent decades, the United States has engaged in a 
policy of self-determination and self-governance with its indigenous 
peoples. Government-to-government relationships provide indigenous 
peoples with the opportunity to work directly with the Federal 
Government on policies affecting their lands, natural resources and 
many other aspects of their well-being.
  This measure does not impact program funding for American Indians and 
Alaska Natives. Federal programs for Native Hawaiian health, education, 
and housing are already administered by

[[Page S2202]]

the Departments of Health and Human Services, Education, and Housing 
and Urban Development. The bill I introduce today contains a provision 
which makes clear that this bill does not authorize new eligibility for 
participation in any programs and services provided by the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs. This bill does not authorize gaming in Hawaii. In fact, 
it clearly states that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, IGRA, does not 
apply to the Native Hawaiian governing entity.

  Finally, this measure does not preclude Native Hawaiians from seeking 
alternatives in the international arena. This measure focuses on self-
determination within the framework of Federal law and seeks to 
establish equality in the Federal policies extended towards American 
Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians.
  We introduced similar legislation during the 106th and 107th 
Congresses. A previous version of this legislation was passed by the 
House of Representatives during the 106th Congress. The legislation is 
widely supported by our indigenous brethren, American Indians and 
Alaska Natives. It is also supported by the Hawaii State Legislature 
which passed two resolutions supporting a government-to-government 
relationship between Native Hawaiians and the United States. Similar 
resolutions have been passed by the Alaska Federation of Natives, 
National Congress of American Indians, Japanese American Citizens' 
League, and the National Education Association.
  The essence of Hawaii is captured not by the physical beauty of its 
islands, but by the beauty of its people. Those who have lived in 
Hawaii have a unique demeanor and attitude which is appropriately 
described as the ``aloha'' spirit. The people of Hawaii demonstrate the 
aloha spirit through their actions--through their generosity, through 
their appreciation of the environment and natural resources, through 
their willingness to care for each other, through their genuine 
friendliness.
  The people of Hawaii share many ethnic backgrounds and cultures. This 
mix of culture and tradition is based on the unique history of Hawaii. 
The Aloha spirit is the legacy of the pride we all share in the culture 
and tradition of Hawaii's indigenous, native peoples, the Native 
Hawaiians. Hawaii's State motto, ``Ua mau ke'ea `o ka `aina i ka 
pono,'' which means ``the life of the land is perpetuated in 
righteousness,'' captures the culture of Native Hawaiians. Prior to 
western contact, Native Hawaiians lived in an advanced society, in 
distinct and structured communities steeped in science. The Native 
Hawaiians honored their `aina, land, and environment, and therefore 
developed methods of irrigation, agriculture, aquaculture, navigation, 
medicine, fishing and other forms of subsistence whereby the land and 
sea were efficiently used without waste or damage. Respect for the 
environment formed the basis of their culture and tradition. It is from 
this culture and tradition that the Aloha spirit, which is demonstrated 
throughout Hawaii, by all of its people, has endured and flourished.
  Despite the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, Native Hawaiians 
never directly relinquished their inherent sovereignty as a people over 
their national lands, either through their government or through a 
plebiscite or referendum. Ever since the overthrow of their government, 
Native Hawaiians have sought to maintain political authority within 
their community. The Federal policy of self-governance and self-
determination recognizes and provides for this inherent right within 
Federal law.
  Throughout my service in the Congress and the Senate, I have worked 
to establish a proper foundation of reconciliation between the United 
States and Native Hawaiians to positively address longstanding issues 
of concern resulting from the overthrow. The legislation we introduce 
today to clarify the political relationship between Native Hawaiians 
and the United States proceeds from our efforts to promote 
reconciliation. This endeavor enjoys overwhelming support from Native 
Hawaiians and all the people of Hawaii.
  In 1978, the people of Hawaii acted to preserve Native Hawaiian 
culture and tradition by amending Hawaii's State constitution to 
establish the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and to give expression to the 
right of self-determination and self-governance at the State level for 
Hawaii's indigenous peoples, Native Hawaiians. Starting with statehood, 
Hawaii endeavored to address and protect the rights and concerns of 
Hawaii's indigenous peoples in accordance with authority delegated 
under Federal policy. The constraints of this approach are evident. 
This bill extends the Federal policy of self-determination and self-
governance to Native Hawaiians at the Federal level through a 
government-to-government relationship with the Native Hawaiian 
governing entity.
  This measure is not being introduced to circumvent the 1999 United 
States Supreme Court decision in the case of Rice v. Cayeano. The Rice 
case was a voting rights case whereby the Supreme Court held that the 
State of Hawaii must allow all citizens of Hawaii to vote for the 
trustees of a quasi-State agency, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. 
Nothing in this legislation would alter the eligibility of the 
electorate who votes for the Board of Trustees for the Office of 
Hawaiian Affairs.
  This measure is critical to the people of Hawaii because it provides 
the structure necessary to address many longstanding issues facing 
Hawaii's indigenous peoples and the State of Hawaii. By addressing and 
resolving these matters, we continue our process of healing, a process 
of reconciliation not only within the United States, but within the 
State of Hawaii. The time has come for us to be able to address these 
deeply rooted issues in order for us to be able to move forward as one.
  I cannot emphasize how important this issue is for the people of 
Hawaii. At the state level, I will continue to work with the Hawaii 
State Legislature which has expressed its support for this legislation. 
I will also be working with Governor Linda Lingle, Hawaii's newly 
elected Governor, who has expressed her support for Federal recognition 
for Native Hawaiians. I look forward to continuing my discussions with 
officials within the Federal Government to address issues related to 
this bill, and I continue to welcome input from the people of Hawaii as 
to how we should move forward as a State, and as a community, to 
address longstanding issues resulting from the overthrow of the Kingdom 
of Hawaii.
  We have an established record of United States' commitment to 
reconciliation with Native Hawaiians. This legislation is another step 
forward to honoring that commitment. I ask all my colleagues to join me 
in enacting this critical measure for the people of Hawaii.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of this measure 
be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 344

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

     SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

       Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) The Constitution vests Congress with the authority to 
     address the conditions of the indigenous, native people of 
     the United States.
       (2) Native Hawaiians, the native people of the Hawaiian 
     archipelago which is now part of the United States, are 
     indigenous, native people of the United States.
       (3) The United States has a special trust relationship to 
     promote the welfare of the native people of the United 
     States, including Native Hawaiians.
       (4) Under the treaty making power of the United States, 
     Congress exercised its constitutional authority to confirm a 
     treaty between the United States and the government that 
     represented the Hawaiian people, and from 1826 until 1893, 
     the United States recognized the independence of the Kingdom 
     of Hawaii, extended full diplomatic recognition to the 
     Hawaiian Government, and entered into treaties and 
     conventions with the Hawaiian monarchs to govern commerce and 
     navigation in 1826, 1842, 1849, 1875, and 1887.
       (5) Pursuant to the provisions of the Hawaiian Homes 
     Commission Act, 1920 (42 Stat. 108, chapter 42), the United 
     States set aside 203,500 acres of land in the Federal 
     territory that later became the State of Hawaii to address 
     the conditions of Native Hawaiians.
       (6) By setting aside 203,500 acres of land for Native 
     Hawaiian homesteads and farms, the Act assists the Native 
     Hawaiian community in maintaining distinct native settlements 
     throughout the State of Hawaii.
       (7) Approximately 6,800 Native Hawaiian lessees and their 
     family members reside on Hawaiian Home Lands and 
     approximately 18,000 Native Hawaiians who are eligible to 
     reside on the Home Lands are on a waiting list to receive 
     assignments of land.
       (8) In 1959, as part of the compact admitting Hawaii into 
     the United States, Congress

[[Page S2203]]

     established the Ceded Lands Trust for 5 purposes, 1 of which 
     is the betterment of the conditions of Native Hawaiians. Such 
     trust consists of approximately 1,800,000 acres of land, 
     submerged lands, and the revenues derived from such lands, 
     the assets of which have never been completely inventoried or 
     segregated.
       (9) Throughout the years, Native Hawaiians have repeatedly 
     sought access to the Ceded Lands Trust and its resources and 
     revenues in order to establish and maintain native 
     settlements and distinct native communities throughout the 
     State.
       (10) The Hawaiian Home Lands and the Ceded Lands provide an 
     important foundation for the ability of the Native Hawaiian 
     community to maintain the practice of Native Hawaiian 
     culture, language, and traditions, and for the survival of 
     the Native Hawaiian people.
       (11) Native Hawaiians have maintained other distinctly 
     native areas in Hawaii.
       (12) On November 23, 1993, Public Law 103-150 (107 Stat. 
     1510) (commonly known as the Apology Resolution) was enacted 
     into law, extending an apology on behalf of the United States 
     to the Native people of Hawaii for the United States role in 
     the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii.
       (13) The Apology Resolution acknowledges that the overthrow 
     of the Kingdom of Hawaii occurred with the active 
     participation of agents and citizens of the United States and 
     further acknowledges that the Native Hawaiian people never 
     directly relinquished their claims to their inherent 
     sovereignty as a people over their national lands to the 
     United States, either through their monarchy or through a 
     plebiscite or referendum.
       (14) The Apology Resolution expresses the commitment of 
     Congress and the President to acknowledge the ramifications 
     of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and to support 
     reconciliation efforts between the United States and Native 
     Hawaiians; and to have Congress and the President, through 
     the President's designated officials, consult with Native 
     Hawaiians on the reconciliation process as called for under 
     the Apology Resolution.
       (15) Despite the overthrow of the Hawaiian Government, 
     Native Hawaiians have continued to maintain their separate 
     identity as a distinct native community through the formation 
     of cultural, social, and political institutions, and to give 
     expression to their rights as native people to self-
     determination and self-governance as evidenced through their 
     participation in the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.
       (16) Native Hawaiians also give expression to their rights 
     as native people to self-determination and self-governance 
     through the provision of governmental services to Native 
     Hawaiians, including the provision of health care services, 
     educational programs, employment and training programs, 
     children's services, conservation programs, fish and wildlife 
     protection, agricultural programs, native language immersion 
     programs and native language immersion schools from 
     kindergarten through high school, as well as college and 
     master's degree programs in native language immersion 
     instruction, and traditional justice programs, and by 
     continuing their efforts to enhance Native Hawaiian self-
     determination and local control.
       (17) Native Hawaiians are actively engaged in Native 
     Hawaiian cultural practices, traditional agricultural 
     methods, fishing and subsistence practices, maintenance of 
     cultural use areas and sacred sites, protection of burial 
     sites, and the exercise of their traditional rights to gather 
     medicinal plants and herbs, and food sources.
       (18) The Native Hawaiian people wish to preserve, develop, 
     and transmit to future Native Hawaiian generations their 
     ancestral lands and Native Hawaiian political and cultural 
     identity in accordance with their traditions, beliefs, 
     customs and practices, language, and social and political 
     institutions, and to achieve greater self-determination over 
     their own affairs.
       (19) This Act provides for a process within the framework 
     of Federal law for the Native Hawaiian people to exercise 
     their inherent rights as a distinct aboriginal, indigenous, 
     native community to reorganize a Native Hawaiian governing 
     entity for the purpose of giving expression to their rights 
     as native people to self-determination and self-governance.
       (20) The United States has declared that--
       (A) the United States has a special responsibility for the 
     welfare of the native peoples of the United States, including 
     Native Hawaiians;
       (B) Congress has identified Native Hawaiians as a distinct 
     indigenous group within the scope of its Indian affairs 
     power, and has enacted dozens of statutes on their behalf 
     pursuant to its recognized trust responsibility; and
       (C) Congress has also delegated broad authority to 
     administer a portion of the Federal trust responsibility to 
     the State of Hawaii.
       (21) The United States has recognized and reaffirmed the 
     special trust relationship with the Native Hawaiian people 
     through the enactment of the Act entitled ``An Act to provide 
     for the admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union'', 
     approved March 18, 1959 (Public Law 86-3; 73 Stat. 4) by--
       (A) ceding to the State of Hawaii title to the public lands 
     formerly held by the United States, and mandating that those 
     lands be held in public trust for 5 purposes, one of which is 
     for the betterment of the conditions of Native Hawaiians; and
       (B) transferring the United States responsibility for the 
     administration of the Hawaiian Home Lands to the State of 
     Hawaii, but retaining the authority to enforce the trust, 
     including the exclusive right of the United States to consent 
     to any actions affecting the lands which comprise the corpus 
     of the trust and any amendments to the Hawaiian Homes 
     Commission Act, 1920 (42 Stat. 108, chapter 42) that are 
     enacted by the legislature of the State of Hawaii affecting 
     the beneficiaries under the Act.
       (22) The United States continually has recognized and 
     reaffirmed that--
       (A) Native Hawaiians have a cultural, historic, and land-
     based link to the aboriginal, native people who exercised 
     sovereignty over the Hawaiian Islands;
       (B) Native Hawaiians have never relinquished their claims 
     to sovereignty or their sovereign lands;
       (C) the United States extends services to Native Hawaiians 
     because of their unique status as the aboriginal, native 
     people of a once sovereign nation with whom the United States 
     has a political and legal relationship; and
       (D) the special trust relationship of American Indians, 
     Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians to the United States 
     arises out of their status as aboriginal, indigenous, native 
     people of the United States.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Aboriginal, indigenous, native people.--The term 
     ``aboriginal, indigenous, native people'' means those people 
     whom Congress has recognized as the original inhabitants of 
     the lands and who exercised sovereignty prior to European 
     contact in the areas that later became part of the United 
     States.
       (2) Apology resolution.--The term ``Apology Resolution'' 
     means Public Law 103-150 (107 Stat. 1510), a joint resolution 
     extending an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the 
     United States for the participation of agents of the United 
     States  in the January 17, 1893, overthrow of the Kingdom of 
     Hawaii.
       (3) Ceded lands.--The term ``ceded lands'' means those 
     lands which were ceded to the United States by the Republic 
     of Hawaii under the Joint Resolution to provide for annexing 
     the Hawaiian Islands to the United States of July 7, 1898 (30 
     Stat. 750), and which were later transferred to the State of 
     Hawaii in the Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the 
     admission of the State of Hawaii into the Union'' approved 
     March 18, 1959 (Public Law 86-3; 73 Stat. 4).
       (4) Indigenous, native people.--The term ``indigenous, 
     native people'' means the lineal descendants of the 
     aboriginal, indigenous, native people of the United States.
       (5) Interagency coordinating group.--The term ``Interagency 
     Coordinating Group'' means the Native Hawaiian Interagency 
     Coordinating Group established under section 5.
       (6) Native hawaiian.--
       (A) Prior to the recognition by the United States of the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity, the term ``Native 
     Hawaiian'' means the indigenous, native people of Hawaii who 
     are the direct lineal descendants of the aboriginal, 
     indigenous, native people who resided in the islands that now 
     comprise the State of Hawaii on or before January 1, 1893, 
     and who occupied and exercised sovereignty in the Hawaiian 
     archipelago, including the area that now constitutes the 
     State of Hawaii, and includes all Native Hawaiians who 
     were eligible in 1921 for the programs authorized by the 
     Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (42 Stat. 108, chapter 42) 
     and their lineal descendants.
       (B) Following the recognition by the United States of the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity, the term ``Native 
     Hawaiian'' shall have the meaning given to such term in the 
     organic governing documents of the Native Hawaiian governing 
     entity.
       (7) Native hawaiian governing entity.--The term ``Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity'' means the governing entity 
     organized by the Native Hawaiian people.
       (8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.

     SEC. 3. UNITED STATES POLICY AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Policy.--The United States reaffirms that--
       (1) Native Hawaiians are a unique and distinct, indigenous, 
     native people, with whom the United States has a political 
     and legal relationship;
       (2) the United States has a special trust relationship to 
     promote the welfare of Native Hawaiians;
       (3) Congress possesses the authority under the Constitution 
     to enact legislation to address the conditions of Native 
     Hawaiians and has exercised this authority through the 
     enactment of--
       (A) the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920 (42 Stat. 108, 
     chapter 42);
       (B) the Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the admission 
     of the State of Hawaii into the Union'', approved March 18, 
     1959 (Public Law 86-3; 73 Stat. 4); and
       (C) more than 150 other Federal laws addressing the 
     conditions of Native Hawaiians;
       (4) Native Hawaiians have--
       (A) an inherent right to autonomy in their internal 
     affairs;
       (B) an inherent right of self-determination and self-
     governance; and
       (C) the right to reorganize a Native Hawaiian governing 
     entity; and
       (5) the United States shall continue to engage in a process 
     of reconciliation and political relations with the Native 
     Hawaiian people.

[[Page S2204]]

       (b) Purpose.--It is the intent of Congress that the purpose 
     of this Act is to provide a process for the recognition by 
     the United States of a Native Hawaiian governing entity for 
     purposes of continuing a government-to-government 
     relationship.

     SEC. 4. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OFFICE FOR NATIVE 
                   HAWAIIAN RELATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There is established within the Office of 
     the Secretary the United States Office for Native Hawaiian 
     Relations.
       (b) Duties of the Office.--The United States Office for 
     Native Hawaiian Relations shall--
       (1) effectuate and coordinate the trust relationship 
     between the Native Hawaiian people and the United States, and 
     upon the recognition of the Native Hawaiian governing entity 
     by the United States, between the Native Hawaiian governing 
     entity and the United States through the Secretary, and with 
     all other Federal agencies;
       (2) continue the process of reconciliation with the Native 
     Hawaiian people, and upon the recognition of the Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity by the United States, continue the 
     process of reconciliation with the Native Hawaiian governing 
     entity;
       (3) fully integrate the principle and practice of 
     meaningful, regular, and appropriate consultation with the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity by providing timely notice 
     to, and consulting with the Native Hawaiian people and the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity prior to taking any actions 
     that may have the potential to significantly affect Native 
     Hawaiian resources, rights, or lands;
       (4) consult with the Interagency Coordinating Group, other 
     Federal agencies, and with relevant agencies of the State of 
     Hawaii on policies, practices, and proposed actions affecting 
     Native Hawaiian resources, rights, or lands; and
       (5) prepare and submit to the Committee on Indian Affairs 
     and the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the 
     Senate, and the Committee on Resources of the House of 
     Representatives an annual report detailing the activities of 
     the Interagency Coordinating Group that are undertaken with 
     respect to the continuing process of reconciliation and to 
     effect meaningful consultation with the Native Hawaiian 
     governing entity and providing recommendations for any 
     necessary changes to existing  Federal statutes or 
     regulations promulgated under the authority of Federal 
     law.

     SEC. 5. NATIVE HAWAIIAN INTERAGENCY COORDINATING GROUP.

       (a) Establishment.--In recognition of the fact that Federal 
     programs authorized to address the conditions of Native 
     Hawaiians are largely administered by Federal agencies other 
     than the Department of the Interior, there is established an 
     interagency coordinating group to be known as the ``Native 
     Hawaiian Interagency Coordinating Group''.
       (b) Composition.--The Interagency Coordinating Group shall 
     be composed of officials, to be designated by the President, 
     from--
       (1) each Federal agency that administers Native Hawaiian 
     programs, establishes or implements policies that affect 
     Native Hawaiians, or whose actions may significantly or 
     uniquely impact on Native Hawaiian resources, rights, or 
     lands; and
       (2) the United States Office for Native Hawaiian Relations 
     established under section 4.
       (c) Lead Agency.--The Department of the Interior shall 
     serve as the lead agency of the Interagency Coordinating 
     Group, and meetings of the Interagency Coordinating Group 
     shall be convened by the lead agency.
       (d) Duties.--The responsibilities of the Interagency 
     Coordinating Group shall be--
       (1) the coordination of Federal programs and policies that 
     affect Native Hawaiians or actions by any agency or agencies 
     of the Federal Government which may significantly or uniquely 
     impact on Native Hawaiian resources, rights, or lands;
       (2) to assure that each Federal agency develops a policy on 
     consultation with the Native Hawaiian people, and upon 
     recognition of the Native Hawaiian governing entity by the 
     United States, consultation with the Native Hawaiian 
     governing entity; and
       (3) to assure the participation of each Federal agency in 
     the development of the report to Congress authorized in 
     section 4(b)(5).

     SEC. 6. PROCESS FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE NATIVE HAWAIIAN 
                   GOVERNING ENTITY.

       (a) Recognition of the Native Hawaiian Governing Entity.--
     The right of the Native Hawaiian people to organize for their 
     common welfare and to adopt appropriate organic governing 
     documents is hereby recognized by the United States.
       (b) Process for Recognition.--
       (1) Submittal of organic governing documents.--Following 
     the organization of the Native Hawaiian governing entity, the 
     adoption of organic governing documents, and the election of 
     officers of the Native Hawaiian governing entity, the duly 
     elected officers of the Native Hawaiian governing entity 
     shall submit the organic governing documents of the Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity to the Secretary.
       (2) Certifications.--
       (A) In general.--Within 90 days of the date that the duly 
     elected officers of the Native Hawaiian governing entity 
     submit the organic governing documents to the Secretary, the 
     Secretary shall certify that the organic governing 
     documents--
       (i) establish the criteria for citizenship in the Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity;
       (ii) were adopted by a majority vote of the citizens of the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity;
       (iii) provide for the exercise of governmental authorities 
     by the Native Hawaiian governing entity;
       (iv) provide for the Native Hawaiian governing entity to 
     negotiate with Federal, State, and local governments, and 
     other entities;
       (v) prevent the sale, disposition, lease, or encumbrance of 
     lands, interests in lands, or other assets of the Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity without the consent of the Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity;
       (vi) provide for the protection of the civil rights of the 
     citizens of the Native Hawaiian governing entity and all 
     persons subject to the authority of the Native Hawaiian 
     governing entity, and ensure that the Native Hawaiian 
     governing entity exercises its authority consistent with the 
     requirements of section 202 of the Act of April 11, 1968 (25 
     U.S.C. 1302); and
       (vii) are consistent with applicable Federal law and the 
     special trust relationship between the United States and the 
     indigenous native people of the United States.
       (B) By the secretary.--Within 90 days of the date that the 
     duly elected officers of the Native Hawaiian governing entity 
     submit the organic governing documents to the Secretary, the 
     Secretary shall certify that the State of Hawaii supports the 
     recognition of a Native Hawaiian governing entity by the 
     United States as evidenced by a resolution or act of the 
     Hawaii State legislature.
       (C) Resubmission in case of noncompliance with federal 
     law.--
       (i) Resubmission by the secretary.--If the Secretary 
     determines that the organic governing documents, or any part 
     thereof, are not consistent with applicable Federal law, the 
     Secretary shall resubmit the organic governing documents to 
     the duly elected officers of the Native Hawaiian governing 
     entity along with a justification for each of the Secretary's 
     findings as to why the provisions are not consistent with 
     such law.
       (ii) Amendment and resubmission by the native hawaiian 
     governing entity.--If the organic governing documents are 
     resubmitted to the duly elected officers of the Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity by the Secretary under clause (i), 
     the duly elected officers of the Native Hawaiian governing 
     entity shall--

       (I) amend the organic governing documents to ensure that 
     the documents comply with applicable Federal law; and
       (II) resubmit the amended organic governing documents to 
     the Secretary for certification in accordance with the 
     requirements of this paragraph.

       (D) Certifications deemed made.--The certifications 
     authorized in subparagraph (B) shall be deemed to have been 
     made if the Secretary has not acted within 90 days of the 
     date that the duly elected officers of the Native Hawaiian 
     governing entity have submitted the organic governing 
     documents of the Native Hawaiian governing entity to the 
     Secretary.
       (3) Federal recognition.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of law, upon the election of the officers of the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity and the certifications by 
     the Secretary required under paragraph (1), the United States 
     hereby extends Federal recognition to the Native Hawaiian 
     governing entity as the representative governing body of the 
     Native Hawaiian people.

     SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
     necessary to carry out the activities authorized in this Act.

     SEC. 8. REAFFIRMATION OF DELEGATION OF FEDERAL AUTHORITY; 
                   NEGOTIATIONS.

       (a) Reaffirmation.--The delegation by the United States of 
     authority to the State of Hawaii to address the conditions of 
     the indigenous, native people of Hawaii contained in the Act 
     entitled ``An Act to provide for the admission of the State 
     of Hawaii into the Union'' approved March 18, 1959 (Public 
     Law 86-3; 73 Stat. 5) is hereby reaffirmed.
       (b) Negotiations.--Upon the Federal recognition of the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity by the United States, the 
     United States is authorized to negotiate and enter into an 
     agreement with the State of Hawaii and the Native Hawaiian 
     governing entity regarding the transfer of lands, resources, 
     and assets dedicated to Native Hawaiian use to the Native 
     Hawaiian governing entity. Nothing in this Act is intended to 
     serve as a settlement of any claims against the United 
     States.

     SEC. 9. APPLICABILITY OF CERTAIN FEDERAL LAWS.

       (a) Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.--Nothing contained in 
     this Act shall be construed as an authorization for the 
     Native Hawaiian governing entity to conduct gaming activities 
     under the authority of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 
     U.S.C. 2701 et seq.).
       (b) Bureau of Indian Affairs.--Nothing contained in this 
     Act shall be construed as an authorization for eligibility to 
     participate in any programs and services provided by the 
     Bureau of Indian Affairs for any persons not otherwise 
     eligible for such programs or services.

     SEC. 10. SEVERABILITY.

       In the event that any section or provision of this Act is 
     held invalid, it is the intent of Congress that the remaining 
     sections or provisions of this Act shall continue in full 
     force and effect.

[[Page S2205]]

                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. NELSON of Florida (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Graham of 
        Florida, Mr. Edwards, and Mr. Sarbanes):
  S. 345. A bill to amend the title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
prohibit physicians and other health care practitioners from charging 
membership or other incidental fee (or requiring purchase of other 
items or services) as a prerequisite for the provision of an item or 
service to a medicare beneficiary; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
Equal Access to Medicare Act to combat the growing practice of 
``concierge care'' medical practices. As my colleagues may recall I 
introduced similar legislation last Congress to deal with the growing 
problem of doctors shutting down their practices and opening new ones, 
only accepting those patients willing to pay a membership fee. These 
fees range from $1,500 to $20,000 annually. By charging these dues, or 
requiring patients to purchase non-Medicare covered services, doctors 
have been able to shrink their patient load and maintain high profit 
margins while continuing to bill Medicare, all on the backs of low- and 
middle-income beneficiaries.
  This is a dangerous model that causes significant disparities in the 
care available to Medicare beneficiaries. A doctor receiving Medicare 
reimbursement should not be allowed to turn away those Medicare 
beneficiaries who cannot, or choose not to pay a membership fee. My 
bill simply prevents Medicare from reimbursing doctors who charge 
membership fees or require the purchase of non-Medicare covered 
services as a condition for the provision of care.
  Since the introduction of this bill in 2001, the practice has been 
rapidly expanding with versions in many states. As an increasing number 
of Medicare beneficiaries voice their concerns, it is time for Congress 
to act. I hope that as we debate Medicare modernization this year, 
Congress will agree to put an end to this egregious practice.
  In addition to the concerns of seniors, health care advocacy groups 
have begun to weigh in as well. Both the American Academy of Family 
Physicians and the American Medical Association have expressed concern 
about the ``. . . risks associated with the spread of this model'', 
AMA, June 2002 report. Should this practice proliferate, a doctor 
shortage for low- and middle-income Medicare beneficiaries is likely, 
exacerbating an already ailing health care marketplace.
  I must emphasize: this bill does not interfere with a doctor's 
ability to set up a practice with a limited number of patients while 
remaining adequately compensated. Nor would doctors who participate in 
Medicare be prevented from contracting privately with patients for non-
Medicare covered services. It simply provides that doctors who 
participate in the Medicare program may not select patients based upon 
willingness or ability to pay a fee for other services. This is the 
same standard that private insurance companies apply to their 
providers.
  I hope my colleagues will join me in helping Medicare keep its 
promise of accessibility to seniors who have paid a lifetime of 
``premiums.''
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 345

       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 ``Equal Access to Medicare Act 
     of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF INCIDENTAL FEES AND REQUIRED PURCHASE 
                   OF NONCOVERED ITEMS OR SERVICES UNDER MEDICARE.

       (a) In General.--Section 1842 of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1395u) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(u) Prohibition of Incidental Fees or Requiring Purchase 
     of Noncovered Items or Services.--
       ``(1) In general.--A physician, practitioner (as described 
     in section 1842(b)(18)(C)), or other individual may not--
       ``(A) charge a membership fee or any other incidental fee 
     to a medicare beneficiary (as defined in section 
     1802(b)(5)(A)); or
       ``(B) require a medicare beneficiary (as so defined) to 
     purchase a noncovered item or service,
     as a prerequisite for the provision of a covered item or 
     service to the beneficiary under this title.
       ``(2) Construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall be 
     construed to apply the prohibition under paragraph (1) to a 
     physician, practitioner, or other individual described in 
     such subsection who does not accept any funds under this 
     title.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to membership fees and other charges made, or 
     purchases of items and services required, on or after the 
     date of enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEVIN (for himself and Mr. Thomas):
  S. 346. A bill to amend the Office of Federal Procurement Policy Act 
to establish a governmentwide policy requiring competition in certain 
executive agency procurements; to the Committee on Governmental 
Affairs.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with Senator Craig 
Thomas in introducing the Federal Prison Industries Competition in 
Contracting Act. Our bill is based on a straightforward premise: it is 
unfair for Federal Prison Industries to deny businesses in the private 
sector an opportunity to compete for sales to their own government.
  I repeat: the bill that we are introducing today, it enacted, would 
do nothing more than permit private sector companies to compete for 
Federal contracts that are paid for with their dollars. It may seem 
incredible that they are denied this opportunity today, but that is the 
law, because if Federal Prison Industries says that it wants a 
contract, it gets that contract, regardless whether a company in the 
private sector may offer to provide the product better, cheaper, or 
faster.
  We have made considerable progress on this issue since Senator Thomas 
and I introduced a similar bill in the 107th congress. Two years ago, 
the Senate voted 74-24 to end Federal Prison Industries' monopoly on 
Department of Defense contracts. Not only was that provision enacted 
into law, we were able to strengthen it with a second provision in last 
year's defense bill.
  Despite this progress, much work remains to be done. As of today, 
Federal Prison Industries retains its monopoly on the contracts of 
every agency of the Federal Government, other than the Department of 
Defense. This means that all other Federal agencies, including the new 
Department of Homeland Security, may be required to purchase products 
from Federal Prison Industries. It also means that private sector 
companies may find it impossible to sell their products to their own 
government, even when their products outperform FPI products in terms 
of price, quality and time of delivery.
  The bill that we are introducing today would not limit the ability of 
Federal Prison Industries to sell its products to Federal agencies. It 
would simply say that these sales should be made on a competitive, 
rather than a sole-source basis.
  FPI starts with a significant advantage in any competition with the 
private sector, since FPI pays inmates less than two dollars an hour, 
far below the minimum wage and a small fraction of the wage paid to 
most private sector workers in competing industries. And of course, the 
taxpayers provide a direct subsidy to Federal Prison Industries 
products by picking up the cost of feeding, clothing, and housing the 
inmates who provide the labor. Given those advantages, there is no 
reason why we should still require Federal agencies to purchase 
products from FPI even when they are more expensive or of a lower 
quality than competing commercial items. I can think of no reason why 
private industry should be prohibited from competing for these federal 
agency contracts.

  We have made several changes to this bill since it was introduced in 
the 107th Congress. The new bill has been harmonized with the 
provisions that we have already enacted for the Department of Defense, 
to ensure that we will have a single, government-wide procurement 
policy for agencies purchasing products available from Federal Prison 
industries. This government-wide policy would be codified in the Office 
of Federal Procurement Policy Act, which is the primary procurement 
statute that applies to both defense and non-defense agencies. I 
believe that these changes will strengthen the bill and reinforce its 
underlying intent.

[[Page S2206]]

  Federal Prison Industries has repeatedly claimed that it provides a 
quality product at a price that is competitive with current market 
prices. Indeed, the Federal Prison Industries statute requires them to 
do so. That statute states that FPI may provide to Federal agencies 
products that ``meet their requirements'' at prices that do not 
``exceed current market prices''.
  Yet, FPI remains unwilling to compete with private sector businesses 
and their employees, or even to permit federal agencies to compare 
their products and prices with those available in the private sector. 
Indeed, FPI has tried to prohibit Federal agencies from conducting 
market research, as they would ordinarily do, to determine whether the 
price and quality or FPI products is comparable to what is available in 
the commercial marketplace. Instead, Federal agencies are directed to 
contact FPI, which acts as the sole arbiter of whether the product 
meets the agency's requirements.
  The result is totally and understandably frustrating to private 
sector businesses and their employees who are denied an opportunity to 
compete for Federal business, as well as to the Federal agencies who 
are forced to buy FPI products. The frustration of these businesses 
comes through in a series of letters that were placed in the record of 
a House Small Business Committee hearing in the last Congress. One 
letter stated with regard to UNICOR--the trade name used by Federal 
Prison Industries:

       Dear Mr. Chairman: My name is Billy Carroll; I am an 
     outside sales representatives with C&C Office Supply Co. in 
     Biloxi Mississippi. Our company has been in business for over 
     20 years and we employ 20 people.
       During the course of our 20-year history we have done 
     considerable business with numerous governmental agencies and 
     military installations. Some of them being Naval Construction 
     Battalion in Gulfport, Mississippi; Air National Guard in 
     Gulfport; Keesler Air Force Base in Biloxi; Naval Station in 
     Pascagoula; and NASA in Stennis Space Center.
       As a result of FPI's unfair monopolistic practices, we have 
     seen sales from these governmental agencies go from 
     $100,000.00 a month to less than $5,000 a month.
       There are numerous horror stories we hear from our 
     customers who deal with UNICOR. The most recent one being 
     that a customer had to wait 5 months to get their furniture. 
     When the furniture finally arrived, it wasn't even what they 
     had ordered. This is something that would have been averted 
     had they been able to use our company or another dealer.
       I could go on about how we could have sold the product much 
     cheaper, which would have saved taxpayers money, faster 
     delivery, which would have increased productivity, and 
     finally better service, but I won't. You get the picture.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Billy Carroll,
                            C&C Office Supply Company, Biloxi, MS.

  Mr. LEVIN. Other vendors expressed even greater frustration about 
FPI's unfair business practices:

       Dear Mr. Chairman: During the past 5 years I have had 
     representatives from UNICOR tell my customers that they had 
     to turn over my proprietary designs to UNICOR, without 
     payment to the dealership. They have told my customers that 
     if they do not buy UNICOR, they will be `reported to 
     congress' and that there is no place else to go for 
     government furniture. They frighten young department of 
     defense officials with words like `illegal' when they ask 
     about waivers.
       The UNICOR reps routinely refuse waivers on the first 
     approach. The answer is a standard `UNICOR has products which 
     will meet your needs.' No explanation. They refuse to answer 
     waiver requests in a timely fashion. I have had a $110,000 
     order for the Arizona Air National Guard in Tucson literally 
     taken away by UNICOR. The representative demanded the designs 
     and said that UNICOR would fill the request. There would be 
     no waiver and no discussion. And she was right. Despite the 
     fact that all of the programming phase had been completed by 
     my designers, at no cost to the federal government, this rep 
     insisted that she knew what was best for this customer. Of 
     course, the products arrived late, in poor condition, was 
     much more expensive than the budgeted GSA furniture--and the 
     reps have not been heard from. The answer is `a 10% discount' 
     or a `free chair.'
       In Texas, my representative worked for 4 months with a 
     customer, completing designs and meeting all relevant 
     criteria. She proposed only products on GSA contract. UNICOR 
     unilaterally refused to waive the chairs, approximately 
     $50,000 worth, because their factories were not at capacity. 
     The fact that the UNICOR chairs do not meet the price point, 
     that UNICOR spent no time with the customers determining 
     function, color or other requirements has no meaning. The 
     seating portion of the order is lost. The remaining portion 
     would have been lost, as well, if the customer had not spent 
     approximately 30 days going from one appeal process to the 
     other attempting to get waivers. Very few customers will take 
     the time to do this. Of course, when the project finally 
     arrives, it will be late and missions will be compromised.
           Sincerely,

                                            Ruthanne S. Pitts,

                                     Simmons Contract Furnishings,
     Tucson, Arizona.
                                  ____

       Dear Mr. Chairman: I personally worked with the staff who 
     had just moved into a new ward at Walter Reed Army Medical 
     Center. We had two meetings during which I took measurements 
     and went over in great detail the furniture items they needed 
     for the report room, reception area, patient education room, 
     two offices and some miscellaneous shelving. The total I 
     quoted to Walter Reed was approximately $13,000 and met their 
     needs exactly. This was in April of 2000. Our delivery would 
     have been completed within a month.
       Because Walter Reed couldn't get a UNICOR waiver (just to 
     determine this fact takes at least 6 weeks) the order was 
     placed with UNICOR and took eight months to be delivered (it 
     just showed up last week) and much of it was not what 
     officials at Walter Reed even ordered. FPI tells their 
     customers what the customer can have rather than meeting the 
     needs of the customer. As an example, we had designed a 
     workstation for the report room to accommodate four 
     computers. UNICOR sent an expensive, massive cherry 
     workstation for an executive office that had to be put in 
     someone's office (who didn't need new furniture) because it 
     was unusable where it was supposed to go. UNICOR charged an 
     additional $1,500.00 to assemble this (and didn't have proper 
     tools to finish the assembly). Our price for the proper item 
     including all set up was less than they charged for set-up 
     alone.
       You know, it's not just the impact FPI has on our 
     businesses, it's the waste of everybody's tax dollars when 
     furniture costs more and doesn't even do the job.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Diane Lake,
     Economy Office Products, Inc. Fairfax, VA.
                                  ____

       Dear Mr. Chairman: I am concerned in the way taxpayers' 
     money is being wasted. A few years ago I had proposed over 
     $100,000.00 in chairs to the VA Medical Center. They were 
     excited about the chair I was proposing on contract. The 
     chair was less expensive than the chair proposed by FPI. The 
     customer also recognized that the chair I was proposing was 
     better in quality and had more ergonomic features, which 
     would assist in some of their health issues. Another comment 
     made by the VA was the problem with the FPI chairs breaking 
     easily. Parts were near impossible to get, so they would 
     throw the FPI chair in the garbage.
       In this situation FPI denied the VA waiver. Regretfully 
     they had to buy FPI chairs. I can not believe this happens in 
     America.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Rick Buchholz,
                                Christianson's Business Furniture.

  Mr. LEVIN. These letters are far from unique. In case after case, 
Federal Prison Industries insists on taking contracts away from private 
businesses, even where FPI's products are inferior, their prices are 
higher, and they are not prepared to deliver in a timely manner. This 
is wrong.
  Avoiding competition is the easy way out, but it isn't the right way 
for FPI, it isn't the right way for the private sector workers whose 
jobs FPI is taking, and it isn't the right way for Federal agencies, 
which too often get stuck with the bill for inferior products that 
can't compete with private sector goods. Competition will be better for 
Federal agencies, better for the taxpayer, and better for working men 
and women around the country.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join Senator Levin 
in introducing a bill that will further my efforts to limit government 
competition with the private sector. Senator Levin and I propose to 
eliminate the mandatory contracting requirement that Federal agencies 
are subject to when it comes to products made by the Federal Prison 
Industries, FPI. Under law, all Federal agencies, except the Department 
of Defense, are required to purchase products made by the FPI. Simply 
put, this bill will require the FPI to compete with the private sector 
for Federal contracts.
  Currently, the FPI employs approximately 22,000 Federal prisoners or 
roughly 20 percent of all Federal prisoners. These prisoners are 
responsible for producing a diverse range of products for the FPI, 
ranging from office furniture to clothing. The remaining 80 percent of 
Federal prisoners, who work, do so in and around Federal prisons.
  While Senator Levin and I believe that it is important to keep 
prisoners working, we do not believe that this effort should unduly 
harm or conflict with law-abiding businesses. This bill seeks to 
minimize the unfair competition that private sector companies face with 
the FPI.

[[Page S2207]]

  The FPI's mandatory source requirement not only undercuts private 
business throughout America, but its mandatory source preference 
oftentimes costs American taxpayers more money. I believe American 
taxpayers would be alarmed to learn of the preferential treatment that 
the FPI enjoys when it comes to Federal contracts.
  As I said before, Senator Levin and I support the goal of keeping 
prisoners busy while serving their time in prison. However, if we allow 
competition in Federal contracts, the FPI will be required to focus its 
efforts in product areas that don't unfairly compete with the private 
sector. Clearly, competitive bidding is a reasonable process that will 
ensure taxpayer's dollars are being spent justly.
  Of particular note, our bill allows contracting officers, within each 
Federal agency, the ability to use competitive procedures for the 
procurement of products. This approach allows Federal agencies to 
select the FPI contracts if he/she believes that the FPI can meet that 
particularly agency's requirements and the product is offered at a fair 
and reasonable price. The above outlined provision in our bill seeks to 
place the control of government procurement in the hands of contracting 
officers, rather than in the hands of the FPI.
  In addition to establishing a competitive procedure for the 
procurement of products, we include a provision that allows the 
Attorney General to grant a waiver to this process if a particular 
contract is deemed essential to the safety and effective administration 
of a particular prison.
  I am confident that by allowing competition for government contracts 
our bill will save tax dollars. As Congress looks for additional cost 
saving practices, the elimination of the FPI's mandatory source 
preference will bring about numerous improvements, not just in cost 
savings, but also in streamlining of the FPI's products.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 347. A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior and the 
Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a joint special resources study to 
evaluate the suitability and feasibility of establishing the Rim of the 
Valley Corridor as a unit of the Santa Monica Mountains National 
Recreation Area, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce this bill 
today to direct the Interior Secretary to conduct a study to evaluate 
the suitability and feasibility of expanding the Santa Monica National 
Recreation Area to include the Rim of the Valley Corridor.
  The Rim of the Valley Corridor encircles the San Fernando Valley, La 
Crescenta, Simi, Santa Clarita, Conejo Valleys, consisting of parts of 
the Santa Monica Mountains, Santa Susanna Mountains, San Gabriel 
Mountains, Verdugo Mountains, San Rafael Hills and connects to the 
adjacent Los Padres and San Bernardino National Forests.
  This parcel of land is unique because of its rare Mediterranean 
ecosystem and wildlife corridor that stretches north from the Santa 
Monicas. With the population growth forecasted to multiply 
exponentially over the next several decades, the need for parks to 
balance out the expected population growth has become critical in 
California.
  Since the creation of the Santa Monica Recreation Area in 1978, 
Federal, State, and local authorities have worked successfully together 
to create and maintain the highly successful Santa Monica Mountains 
National Recreation Area, the world's largest urban park, hemmed in on 
all sides by development.
  Park and recreational lands provide people with a vital refuge from 
urban life while preserving valuable habitat and wildlife. With the 
passage of this legislation, Congress will hold true to its original 
commitment to preserve the scenic, natural, and historic setting of the 
Santa Monica Mountains Recreation Area. With the inclusion of the Rim 
of the Valley Corridor in Santa Monica Mountains Recreation Area, 
greater ecological health and diversity will be promoted, particularly 
for larger animals like mountain lions, bobcats, and the golden eagle.
  After the study called for in this bill is complete, the Secretary of 
the Interior and Congress will be in a key position to determine 
whether the Rim of the Valley warrants national park status.
  This bill enjoys strong support from local and State officials and I 
hope that it will have as much strong bipartisan support this Congress, 
as it did last Congress. Congressman Adam Schiff plans to introduce 
companion legislation for this bill in the House and I applaud his 
commitment to this issue.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself, Mr. Biden, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Bayh, Mr. 
        Smith, and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 348. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make 
higher education more affordable, and for other purposes; to the 
Committee on Finance.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of 
the bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 348

       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 ``Make College Affordable Act 
     of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF DEDUCTION FOR HIGHER EDUCATION EXPENSES.

       (a) Amount of Deduction.--Subsection (b) of section 222 of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to deduction for 
     qualified tuition and related expenses) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(b) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Dollar limitations.--
       ``(A) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     amount allowed as a deduction under subsection (a) with 
     respect to the taxpayer for any taxable year shall not exceed 
     the applicable dollar limit.
       ``(B) Applicable dollar limit.--The applicable dollar limit 
     for any taxable year shall be determined as follows:

                                                             Applicable
``Taxable year:                                          dollar amount:
  2003......................................................$8,000 ....

  2004 and thereafter......................................$12,000.....

       ``(2) Limitation based on modified adjusted gross income.--
       ``(A) In general.--The amount which would (but for this 
     paragraph) be taken into account under subsection (a) shall 
     be reduced (but not below zero) by the amount determined 
     under subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Amount of reduction.--The amount determined under 
     this subparagraph equals the amount which bears the same 
     ratio to the amount which would be so taken into account as--
       ``(i) the excess of--

       ``(I) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for 
     such taxable year, over
       ``(II) $65,000 ($130,000 in the case of a joint return), 
     bears to

       ``(ii) $15,000 ($30,000 in the case of a joint return).
       ``(C) Modified adjusted gross income.--For purposes of this 
     paragraph, the term `modified adjusted gross income' means 
     the adjusted gross income of the taxpayer for the taxable 
     year determined--
       ``(i) without regard to this section and sections 911, 931, 
     and 933, and
       ``(ii) after the application of sections 86, 135, 137, 219, 
     221, and 469.

     For purposes of the sections referred to in clause (ii), 
     adjusted gross income shall be determined without regard to 
     the deduction allowed under this section.
       ``(D) Inflation adjustments.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of any taxable year 
     beginning in a calendar year after 2003, both of the dollar 
     amounts in subparagraph (B)(i)(II) shall be increased by an 
     amount equal to--

       ``(I) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(II) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable 
     year begins, by substituting `calendar year 2002' for 
     `calendar year 1992' in subparagraph (B) thereof.

       ``(ii) Rounding.--If any amount as adjusted under clause 
     (i) is not a multiple of $50, such amount shall be rounded to 
     the nearest multiple of $50.''.
       (b) Qualified Tuition and Related Expenses of Eligible 
     Students.--
       (1) In general.--Section 222(a) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to allowance of deduction) is amended 
     by inserting ``of eligible students'' after ``expenses''.
       (2) Definition of eligible student.--Section 222(d) of such 
     Code (relating to definitions and special rules) is amended 
     by redesignating paragraphs (2) through (6) as paragraphs (3) 
     through (7), respectively, and by inserting after paragraph 
     (1) the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Eligible student.--The term `eligible student' has 
     the meaning given such term by section 25A(b)(3).''.
       (c) Deduction Made Permanent.--Title IX of the Economic 
     Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (relating to 
     sunset of

[[Page S2208]]

     provisions of such Act) shall not apply to the amendments 
     made by section 431 of such Act.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to payments made in taxable years beginning after 
     December 31, 2002.

     SEC. 3. CREDIT FOR INTEREST ON HIGHER EDUCATION LOANS.

       (a) In General.--Subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     nonrefundable personal credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 25B the following new section:

     ``SEC. 25C. INTEREST ON HIGHER EDUCATION LOANS.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an individual, 
     there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax imposed by 
     this chapter for the taxable year an amount equal to the 
     interest paid by the taxpayer during the taxable year on any 
     qualified education loan.
       ``(b) Maximum Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     credit allowed by subsection (a) for the taxable year shall 
     not exceed $1,500.
       ``(2) Limitation based on modified adjusted gross income.--
       ``(A) In general.--If the modified adjusted gross income of 
     the taxpayer for the taxable year exceeds $50,000 ($100,000 
     in the case of a joint return), the amount which would (but 
     for this paragraph) be allowable as a credit under this 
     section shall be reduced (but not below zero) by the amount 
     which bears the same ratio to the amount which would be so 
     allowable as such excess bears to $20,000 ($40,000 in the 
     case of a joint return).
       ``(B) Modified adjusted gross income.--The term `modified 
     adjusted gross income' means adjusted gross income determined 
     without regard to sections 911, 931, and 933.
       ``(C) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any taxable 
     year beginning after 2003, the $50,000 and $100,000 amounts 
     referred to in subparagraph (A) shall be increased by an 
     amount equal to--
       ``(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by
       ``(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under 
     section (1)(f)(3) for the calendar year in which the taxable 
     year begins, by substituting `2002' for `1992'.
       ``(D) Rounding.--If any amount as adjusted under 
     subparagraph (C) is not a multiple of $50, such amount shall 
     be rounded to the nearest multiple of $50.
       ``(c) Dependents Not Eligible for Credit.--No credit shall 
     be allowed by this section to an individual for the taxable 
     year if a deduction under section 151 with respect to such 
     individual is allowed to another taxpayer for the taxable 
     year beginning in the calendar year in which such 
     individual's taxable year begins.
       ``(d) Limit on Period Credit Allowed.--A credit shall be 
     allowed under this section only with respect to interest paid 
     on any qualified education loan during the first 60 months 
     (whether or not consecutive) in which interest payments are 
     required. For purposes of this paragraph, any loan and all 
     refinancings of such loan shall be treated as 1 loan.
       ``(e) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Qualified education loan.--The term `qualified 
     education loan' has the meaning given such term by section 
     221(e)(1).
       ``(2) Dependent.--The term `dependent' has the meaning 
     given such term by section 152.
       ``(f) Special Rules.--
       ``(1) Denial of double benefit.--No credit shall be allowed 
     under this section for any amount taken into account for any 
     deduction under any other provision of this chapter.
       ``(2) Married couples must file joint return.--If the 
     taxpayer is married at the close of the taxable year, the 
     credit shall be allowed under subsection (a) only if the 
     taxpayer and the taxpayer's spouse file a joint return for 
     the taxable year.
       ``(3) Marital status.--Marital status shall be determined 
     in accordance with section 7703.''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for 
     subpart A of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting after 
     the item relating to section 25B the following new item:

``Sec. 25C. Interest on higher education loans.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to any qualified education loan (as defined in 
     section 25C(e)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as 
     added by this section) incurred on, before, or after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, but only with respect to any 
     loan interest payment due after December 31, 2002.

  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I am pleased once again to join my 
colleague from New York, Senator Schumer, to talk about a bill that 
will help American families afford their children's college tuition. 
The bill we are reintroducing today, the Make College Affordable Act, 
will make up to $12,000 in college tuition tax deductible each year, 
while providing graduates with a tax credit to reduce the cost of their 
student loans.
  With the average college graduate earning 80 percent more than the 
average non-college, high school graduate, it is abundantly clear that 
in today's economy a college degree is an absolute necessity. When I 
went to college, it cost about $1,000 a year. That meant, for a family 
making about $12,000 a year, the cost of college was about 6 or 7 
percent of that family's income. Today the average cost of room, board 
and tuition at a four-year public college has jumped to over $9,000 a 
year. The average cost of room, board and tuition at a private four-
year college has jumped to over $25,000. What does this mean? This 
means that hard working American families are spending a larger 
percentage of their income than ever before to send their children to 
school. To attend my alma mater, the University of Delaware, it costs 
nearly 20 percent of a Delaware family's average annual income to cover 
costs. If that same family wants to send their child to a private 
university, approximately 50 percent of their income is required. This 
means that the average American family is likely to spend just as much, 
if not more, on their child's tuition as they are to pay in annual 
mortgage payments.
  I have said it before. How can we expect families to dream of a 
better and brighter future for their children, when the cost of 
attending even some public universities rivals their home mortgage 
payments? We can't.
  That is why in 1995, I first offered an amendment to permit a $10,000 
tuition tax deduction. That is why in 1996 and 1997, I introduced my 
GET AHEAD bill which would have provided students and their families 
with scholarships, tax deductions, and college savings plans. We've 
made some good progress. A number of initiatives were incorporated into 
the 1997 tax bill. Today families have available to them the Hope 
Scholarship--a tax credit of up to $1,500 for the first two years of 
college, and the Lifetime Learning Credit--which permits a 20 percent 
tax credit on up to $10,000 worth of higher education expenses. 
Students can also claim a tax deduction for interest on student loans, 
have the opportunity to consolidate their student loans at low interest 
rates and beginning in 2001, have had the chance to deduct up to $3,000 
in tuition expenses from their Federal income tax.
  And yet, we can and should do more to help qualified students attend 
the college of their dreams. This is why I introduced my Tuition 
Assistance for Families Act in January. This bill would expand current 
tuition tax credits, provide merit scholarships to graduating seniors, 
increase the maximum Pell Grant and raise the tuition tax deduction 
much like the bill before us today.
  I join my friend from New York today to introduce the Make College 
Affordable Act because it will allow most taxpayers to take up to a 
$12,000 tax deduction each year for college tuition and fees. For some 
families this would amount to a tax savings of more than $3,000 each 
year--$3,000 that can go toward their children's doctor visits, 
retirement savings, child care costs and yes, toward their annual 
mortgage payment.
  In addition to the tax deduction, the Schumer-Biden bill will provide 
a tax credit of up to $1,500 for the interest paid on student loans 
over the first five years of repayment. This credit will be available 
to individuals with incomes of up to $50,000, and families with incomes 
up to $100,000. When one considers that the average graduate is $16,928 
in debt, you can imagine how quickly interest payments add up each 
year.
  We are hearing a great deal these days about tax cuts. How we choose 
to provide them, and who we choose to provide them to, is a reflection 
of our nation's priorities and values. What greater priority could 
there be than providing our children with a first class education. 
Let's be smart about our investments when considering the tax proposals 
that come before us. Let's help families provide their children with a 
better life through the promise of a college education. And let's not 
forget that the Make College Affordable Act will not only ensure a 
brighter future for all our children, it will help to guarantee an 
educated and prosperous America down the road.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Ms. Collins, Ms. Landrieu, Ms. 
        Snowe, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Allen, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Dayton, and Mr. 
        Bunning):

[[Page S2209]]

  S. 349. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security Act to repeal 
the Government pension offset and windfall elimination provisions; to 
the Committee on Finance.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague, 
Senator Collins, to introduce legislation to repeal two provisions of 
current law that reduce earned Social Security benefits for teachers 
and other government pensioners--the Windfall Elimination, WEP, 
provision, and the Government Pension Offset, GPO, provision.
  Under current law, public employees, whose salaries are often lower 
than those in the private sector to begin with, find that they are 
penalized and held to a different standard when it comes to retirement 
benefits. The unfair reduction in their benefits makes it more 
difficult to recruit teachers, police officers, and fire fighters.
  The Social Security Windfall Elimination Provision reduces Social 
Security benefits for retirees who paid into Social Security and also 
receive a government pension, such as from a teacher retirement fund. 
Private sector retirees receive monthly Social Security checks equal to 
90 percent of their first $561 in average monthly career earnings, plus 
32 percent of monthly earnings up to $3,381 and 15 percent of earnings 
above $3,381. Government pensioners, however, are only allowed to 
receive 40 percent of the first $561 in career monthly earnings, a 
penalty of $280.50 per month.
  To my mind it is simply unfair, especially at a time when we need to 
be doing all we can to attract qualified people to government service, 
and my legislation will allow government pensioners the chance to earn 
the same 90 percent to which non-government pension recipients are 
entitled.
  The current Government Pension Offset provision reduces Social 
Security spousal benefits by an amount equal to two-thirds of the 
spouse's public employment civil service pension. This can have the 
effect of taking away, entirely, a spouse's benefits from Social 
Security.
  It is beyond my understanding why we would want to discourage people 
from pursuing careers in public service by essentially saying that if 
you do enter public service, your family will suffer by not being able 
to receive the full retirement benefits they would otherwise be 
entitled to.
  Record enrollments in public schools and the projected retirements of 
thousands of veteran teachers are driving an urgent need for teacher 
recruitment. Critical efforts to reduce class sizes also necessitate 
hiring additional teachers. It is estimated that schools will need to 
hire between 2.2 and 2.7 million new teachers nationwide by 2009.
  California has 284,030 teachers currently, but will need to hire an 
additional 300,000 teachers by 2010 to keep up with California's rate 
of student enrollment, which is three times the national average. All 
in all, California has to hire 26,000 new teachers every year.
  To combat the growing teacher shortage crisis, forty-five States and 
the District of Columbia now offer ``alternate routes'' for 
certification to teach in the Nation's public schools. It is a sad 
irony that policymakers are encouraging experienced people to change 
careers and enter the teaching profession at the same time that 
individuals who have worked in other careers are less likely to want to 
become teachers if doing so will affect Social Security benefits they 
worked so hard to earn.
  Almost 300,000 government retirees nationwide are affected by the GPO 
and the WEP, but their impact is greatest in the 13 states that chose 
to keep their own public employee retirement systems, including 
California. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the GPO 
reduces benefits for some 200,000 individuals by more than $3,600 a 
year. The WEP causes already low-paid public employees outside the 
Social Security system, like teachers, firefighters and police 
officers, to lose up to sixty percent of the Social Security benefits 
to which they are entitled. Ironically, the loss of Social Security 
benefits may make these individuals eligible for more costly 
assistance, such as food stamps.
  The reforms that led to the GPO and the WEP are almost 20 years old. 
At the time they were enacted, I'm sure they seemed like a good idea. 
Now that we are witnessing the practical effects of those reforms, I 
hope that Congress will pass legislation to address the unfair 
reduction of benefits that make it even more difficult to recruit and 
retain public employees.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague 
from California, Senator Feinstein, in introducing the Social Security 
Fairness Act, which repeals two provisions of current law--the windfall 
elimination provision, WEP, and the government pension offset, GPO--
that unfairly reduce earned Social Security benefits for many public 
employees. This legislation is of tremendous importance to Maine's 
teachers, police officers, firefighters and other public employees who 
currently are unfairly penalized for working in the private sector when 
the time comes for them to retire.
  Despite their challenging, difficult and sometimes dangerous jobs, 
these invaluable public servants often receive far lower salaries than 
private sector employees. It is therefore doubly unfair to penalize 
them and hold them to a different standard when it comes to their 
Social Security retirement benefits.
  Moreover, at a time when we should be doing all that we can to 
attract qualified people to public service, this unfair reduction in 
Social Security benefits makes it even more difficult for our 
communities to recruit and retain the teachers, police officers, 
firefighters, and other public employees who are so critical to the 
safety and well-being of our families.
  The government pension offset and windfall elimination provisions 
affect government employees and retirees in virtually every State, but 
their effect is most acute in Maine and 14 other States where most 
public employees are not covered by Social Security. Nationwide, more 
than one-third of teachers and school employees, and more than one-
fifth of other public employees, are not covered by Social Security. 
Approximately 250,000 retired Federal, State and local government 
employees across the country have already been adversely affected by 
these provisions. Thousands more stand to be affected in the future.
  The Social Security windfall elimination provision reduces Social 
Security benefits for retirees who paid into Social Security and who 
also receive a government pension from work not covered under Social 
Security, such as pensions from the Maine State Retirement Fund. While 
private sector retirees receive monthly Social Security checks equal to 
90 percent of their first $561 in average monthly career earnings, 
government pensioners are only allowed to receive 40 percent--a harsh 
and unjust penalty of $280.50 per month.
  The government pension offset reduces an individual's survivor 
benefit under Social Security by two-thirds of the amount of his or her 
public pension. Estimates indicate that 9 out of 10 public employees 
affected by the GPO lose their entire spousal benefit, even though 
their deceased spouses paid Social Security taxes for many years.
  This offset is, unfortunately, most harsh for those who can least 
afford the loss: lower-income women. According to the Congressional 
Budget Office, the GPO reduces benefits for some 200,000 individuals by 
more than $3,600 a year--an amount that can make the difference between 
a comfortable retirement and poverty.
  This simply is not fair and not right. Our teachers and other public 
employees face difficult enough challenges in their day-to-day work. 
Individuals who have devoted their lives to public service should not 
have the added burden of worrying about their retirement, and these two 
onerous provisions should be repealed.
  This is an issue that I have heard about at the grocery store, at my 
church, and even at my 30th high school class reunion from my many 
friends who have entered the teaching profession and who are committed 
to living and working in Maine. They love their jobs and the children 
they teach, but they worry about the future and about their financial 
security in retirement.
  I also hear a lot about this issue in my constituent mail. Patricia 
Dupont, for example, of Orland, ME, wrote that, because she taught for 
15 years under

[[Page S2210]]

Social Security in New Hampshire, she is living on a retirement income 
of less than $13,000 after 45 years of teaching. Since she also lost 
survivors' benefits from her husband's Social Security, she calculates 
that a repeal of the WEP and GPO would double her current retirement 
income.
  Wendy Lessard, an English teacher at Mt. Desert Island High School, 
is an example of another unfortunate consequence of the laws. After 10 
years of teaching, she is now considering whether or not to continue 
her career because of the Social Security penalties associated with her 
teacher's pension. She tells me that she has worked vacations in her 
summers and off-hours to be able to make a better wage and pay back her 
student loans. She is just the kind of teacher we want teaching our 
students, but is now contemplating leaving the profession because of 
her concerns about financial security in retirement.
  Moreover, these provisions also penalize private sector employees who 
leave their jobs to become public school teachers. Ruth Wilson, a 
teacher from Otisfield, ME, wrote:

       I entered the teaching profession two years ago, partly in 
     response to the nationwide pleas for educators. As the 
     current pool of educators near retirement in the next few 
     years, our schools face a crisis. Low wages and long hard 
     hours are not great selling points to young students when 
     selecting a career.
       I love teaching and only regretted my decision when I found 
     out about the penalties I will unfairly suffer. In my former 
     life as a well-paid systems manager at State Street Bank in 
     Boston, I contributed the maximum to Social Security each 
     year. When I decided to become an educator, I figured that 
     because of my many years of maximum Social Security 
     contributions, I would still have a livable retirement 
     ``wage.'' I was unaware that I would be penalized as an 
     educator in your State.

  Maine, like many States, is currently facing a serious shortage of 
teachers, and we simply cannot afford to discourage people from 
pursuing important careers in public service in this way. I am 
therefore pleased to join Senator Feinstein in introducing this 
legislation to repeal these two unfair provisions, and I urge my 
colleagues to join us as cosponsors.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Edwards, 
        Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Reid, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Feingold, and Mr. 
        Corzine):
  S. 352. A bill to ensure that commercial insurers cannot engage in 
price fixing, bid rigging, or market allocations to the detriment of 
competition and consumers; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the 
``Medical Malpractice Insurance Antitrust Act of 2003'' along with 
Senators Kennedy, Durbin, Edwards, Rockefeller, Reid, Boxer, Feingold, 
and Corzine. In the deafening debate about medical malpractice, I 
believe this legislation is a clear and calm statement about fixing one 
significant part of the system that is broken--skyrocketing insurance 
premiums for medical malpractice.
  Our health care system is in crisis. We have heard that statement so 
often that it has begun to lose the force of its truth, but that truth 
is one we must confront and the crisis is one we must abate.
  Unfortunately, dramatically rising medical malpractice insurance 
rates are forcing some doctors to abandon their practices or to cross 
State lines to find more affordable situations. Patients who need care 
in high-risk specialties--like obstetrics--and patients in areas 
already under-served by health care providers--like many rural 
communities--are too often left without adequate care.
  We are the richest and most powerful Nation on earth. We should be 
able to ensure access to quality health care to all our citizens and to 
assure the medical profession that its members will not be driven from 
their calling by the manipulations of the malpractice insurance 
industry.
  The debate about the causes of this latest insurance crisis and the 
possible cures grows shrill. I hope today's hearing will be a calmer 
and more constructive discussion. My principal concerns are 
straightforward: That we ensure that our Nation's physicians are able 
to provide the high quality of medical care that our citizens deserve 
and for which the United States is world-renowned, and that in those 
instances where a doctor does harm a patient, that patient should be 
able to seek appropriate redress through our court system.
  To be sure, different States have different experiences with medical 
malpractice insurance, and insurance remains a largely State-regulated 
industry. Each State should endeavor to develop its own solution to 
rising medical malpractice insurance rates because each State has its 
own unique problems. Some States--such as my own, Vermont--while 
experiencing problems, do not face as great a crisis as others. 
Vermont's legislature is at work to find the right answers for our 
State, and the same process is underway now in other States. To 
contrast, in States such as West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Florida, and 
New Jersey, doctors are walking out of work in protest over the 
exorbitant rates being extracted from them by their insurance carriers.
  Thoughtful solutions to the situation will require creative thinking, 
a genuine effort to rectify the problem, and bipartisan consensus to 
achieve real reform. Unfortunately, these are not the characteristics 
of the Administration's proposal. Ignoring the central truth of this 
crisis--that it is a problem in the insurance industry, not the tort 
system--the Administration has proposed a plan that would cap non-
economic damages at $250,000 in medical malpractice cases. The notion 
that such a one-size-fits-all scheme is the answer runs counter to the 
factual experience of the States.
  Most importantly, the President's proposal does nothing to protect 
true victims of medical malpractice. A cap of $250,000 would 
arbitrarily limit compensation that the most seriously injured patients 
are able to receive. The medical malpractice reform debate too often 
ignores the men, women and children whose lives have been 
dramatically--and often permanently--altered by medical errors.
  The President's proposal would prevent such individuals--even if they 
have successfully made their case in a court of law--from receiving 
adequate compensation. We are fortunate in this Nation to have many 
highly qualified medical professional, and this is especially true in 
my own home State of Vermont. Unfortunately, good doctors sometimes 
make errors. It is also unfortunate that some not-so-good doctors 
manage to make their way into the health care system as well. While we 
must do all that we can to support the men and women who commit their 
professional lives to caring for others, we must also ensure that 
patients have access to adequate remedies should they receive 
inadequate care.
  High malpractice insurance premiums are not the result of malpractice 
lawsuit verdicts. They are the result of investment decisions by the 
insurance companies and of business models geared toward ever-
increasing profits. But an insurer that has made a bad investment, or 
that has experienced the same disappointments from Wall Street that so 
many Americans have, should not be able to recoup its losses from the 
doctors it insures. The insurance company should have to bear the 
burdens of its own business model, just as the other businesses in the 
economy do.
  But another fact of the insurance industry's business model requires 
a legislative correction--its blanket exemption from federal antitrust 
laws. Insurers have for years--too many years--enjoyed a benefit that 
is novel in our marketplace. The McCarran-Ferguson Act permits 
insurance companies to operate without being subject to most of the 
Federal antitrust laws, and our Nation's physicians and their patients 
have been the worse off for it. Using their exemption, insurers can 
collude to set rates, resulting in higher premiums than true 
competition would achieve--and because of this exemption, enforcement 
officials cannot investigate any such collusion. If Congress is serious 
about controlling rising premiums, we must objectively limit this broad 
exemption in the McCarran-Ferguson Act.
  That is why today I introduce the ``Medical Malpractice Insurance 
Antitrust Act of 2003.'' I want to thank Senators Kennedy, Durbin, 
Edwards, Rockfeller, Reid, Boxer, Feingold, and Corzine for 
cosponsoring this essential legislation. Our bill modified

[[Page S2211]]

the McCarran-Ferguson Act with respect to medical malpractice 
insurance, and only for the most pernicious antitrust offenses: price 
fixing, bid rigging, and market allocations. Only those anticompetitive 
practices that most certainly will affect premiums are addressed. I am 
hard pressed to imagine that anyone could object to a prohibition on 
insurance carriers' fixing prices or dividing territories. After all, 
the rest of our Nation's industries manage either to abide by these 
laws or pay the consequences.
  Many State insurance commissioners police the industry well within 
the power they are accorded in their own laws, and some States have 
antitrust laws of their own that could cover some anticompetitive 
activities in the insurance industry. Our legislation is a scalpel, not 
a saw. It would not affect regulation of insurance by State insurance 
commissioners and other State regulators. But there is no reason to 
continue a system in which the Federal enforcers are precluded from 
prosecuting the most harmful antitrust violations just because they are 
committed by insurance companies.
  Our legislation is a carefully tailored solution to one critical 
aspect of the problem of excessive medical malpractice insurance rates. 
I hope that quick action by the Judiciary Committee and then by the 
full Senate, will ensure that this important step on the road to 
genuine reform is taken before too much more damage is done to the 
physicians of this country and to the patients they care for.
  Only professional baseball has enjoyed an antitrust exemption 
comparable to that created for the insurance industry by the McCarran-
Ferguson Act. Senator Hatch and I have joined forces several times in 
recent years to scale back that exemption for baseball, and in the Curt 
Flood Act of 1998 we successfully eliminated the exemption as it 
applied to employment relations. I hope we can work together again to 
create more competition in the insurance industry, just as we did with 
baseball.
  If Congress is serious about controlling rising medical malpractice 
insurance premiums, then we must limit the broad exemption to Federal 
antitrust law and promote real competition in the insurance industry.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN:
  S. 354. A bill to authorize the Secretary of Transportation to 
establish the National Transportation Modeling and Analysis Program to 
complete an advanced transportation simulation model, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that I believe will go a long way in helping to reduce congestion and 
improve safety and security throughout the Nation's transportation 
network. Today I am introducing the National Transportation Modeling 
and Analysis Program Establishment Act, or NATMAP for short.
  The purpose of this bill is to authorize the Secretary of 
Transportation to complete an advanced computer model that will 
simulate, in a single integrated system, traffic flows over every major 
transportation mode, including highways, air traffic, railways, inland 
waterways, seaports, pipelines, and other intermodal connections. The 
advanced model will simulate flows of both passenger and freight 
traffic.
  Our transportation network is a central component of our economy and 
fundamental to our freedom and quality of life. America's mobility is 
the engine of our free market system. The food we eat, the clothes we 
wear, the materials for our homes and offices, and the energy to heat 
our homes and power our businesses all come to us over the Nation's 
vast transportation network. Originating with a producer in one region, 
materials and products may travel via any number of combinations of 
truck, rail, airplane, and barge before reaching their final 
destinations.
  Today, the Internet connects the world electronically. But it is our 
transportation network that provides the vital links for the movement 
of both people and goods domestically and around the world. According 
to the latest statistics, our transportation industry carries over 11 
billion tons of freight per year worth about $7 trillion. Of the 3.7 
trillion ton-miles of freight carried in 1998, 1.4 trillion went by 
rail, 1 trillion by truck, 673 billion by domestic water 
transportation, 620 billion by pipeline, and 14 billion by air carrier.
  Individuals also depend on our transportation system--be it passenger 
rail, commercial airline, intercity bus, or the family car--for 
business travel or simply to enjoy a family vacation. Excluding public 
transit, passengers on our highways traveled a total of 4.2 trillion 
passenger-miles in 1998. Airlines carried another 463 billion 
passenger-miles. Transit companies and rail lines carried 50 billion.
  We are also interconnected to the world's transportation system, and, 
as I am sure every Senator well knows, foreign trade is an increasingly 
critical component of our economy. Our Nation's seaports, international 
airports, and border crossing with Canada and Mexico are the gateways 
through which passengers and cargo flow between America and the rest of 
the world. The smooth flow of trade, both imports and exports, would 
not be possible without a robust transportation network and the direct 
links it provides to our international ports of entry.
  It should be clear that key to our continuing economic strength is a 
transportation system that is safe, secure and efficient. Today, we are 
fortunate to have one of the best transportation networks in the world, 
and I believe we need to keep it that way. However, we are starting to 
see signs of strain from the dramatic increase in traffic. For example, 
according to the Department of Transportation, from 1980 to 2000, 
highway travel alone increased a whopping 80 percent. Between 1993 and 
1997, the total tons of freight activity grew by over 14 percent and 
truck activity grew by 21 percent. In the future, truck travel is 
expected to grow by more than 3 percent per year--nearly doubling by 
2020. As a result of the increased highway traffic, the operational 
performance, a measure of congestion, has deteriorated dramatically. 
For example, FHWA estimates that a typical trip that would take 20 
minutes in 1987 now takes over 30 minutes--a dramatic 50 percent 
increase.
  Meanwhile, the strong growth in foreign trade is putting increased 
pressure on ports, airports, and border crossings, as well as 
contributing to congestion throughout the transportation network. 
According to DoT, U.S. international trade more than doubled between 
1990 and 2000, rising from $891 billion to $2.2 trillion.
  Congestion and delay inevitably result when traffic rates approach 
the capacity of a system to handle that traffic. I do believe increased 
congestion in our transportation system is a growing threat to the 
nation's economy. Delays in any part of the vast network lead to 
economic costs, wasted fuel, increased pollution, and a reduced quality 
of life. Moreover, in the future new security measures could also 
increase delays and disruptions in the flow of goods through our 
international gateways.
  To deal with the ever-increasing loading of our transportation 
network we will need to find ways to improve system efficiency as well 
as to expand some critical elements of the system. However, in planning 
for any improvements, we must examine the impact on the whole 
transportation system that would result from a change in one part of 
the system That's exactly the goal of the bill I am introducing today.
  By simulating the Nation's entire transportation infrastructure as a 
single, integrated system, the National Transportation Analysis and 
Modeling Program will allow policy makers at the State, regional, and 
national levels to evaluate the implications of new transportation 
policies and actions. To ensure that all possible interrelated impacts 
are included, the model must simulate individual carriers and the 
transportation infrastructure used by each of the carriers in an 
interdependent and dynamic system. The advantage of this simulation of 
individual carriers and shipments is that the nation's transportation 
system can be examined at any level of detail--from the path of an 
individual truck to national multi-modal traffic flows.
  Some of the transportation planning issues that could be addressed 
with NATMAP include: What infrastructure improvements result in the 
greatest

[[Page S2212]]

gains to overall system security and efficiency? How would the network 
respond to shifts in population or trade flows? How would the system 
respond to major disruptions caused by a natural disaster or another 
unthinkable terrorist attack? What effect would system delays due to 
increased security measures have on traffic flow and congestion?
  Preliminary work on an advanced transportation model has been 
underway for several years at Los Alamos National Laboratory. As I'm 
sure most senators know, Los Alamos has a long and impressive history 
in computer simulations of complex systems, including the recent 
completion of the TRANSIMS model of transportation systems in 
metropolitan areas. The development of TRANSIMS for FHWA was originally 
authorized in section 1210 of TEA-21. NATMAP builds on the original 
work at LANL on the TRANSIMS model.
  The initial work at LANL on NATMAP, funded in part by DoT, DoD, and 
the lab's own internal research and development program, demonstrated 
the technical feasibility of building a nation-wide freight 
transportation model that can simulate the movement of millions of 
trucks across the nation's highway system. During this initial 
development phase, the model was called the National Transportation 
Network and Analysis Capability, or NTNAC for short. In 2001, with 
funding from the Federal Highway Administration, LANL further developed 
the model and completed an assessment of cargo flows resulting from 
trade between the U.S. and Latin America.
  These preliminary studies have clearly demonstrated the value to the 
nation of a new comprehensive modeling system. I do believe that the 
computer model represents a leap ahead in transportation modeling and 
analysis capability. Indeed, Secretary of Transportation Norm Mineta, 
in a letter to me dated April 9 of this year, had this to say about the 
early simulations: ``The DOT agrees that NTNAC shows great promise of 
producing a tool that would be useful for analyzing the national 
transportation system as a single, integrated system. We agree that 
NTNAC would provide DOT with important new capabilities to assess and 
formulate critical policy and investment options and to help address 
homeland security and vulnerabilities in the nation's transportation 
network.''
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of Secretary Mineta's letter be 
printed in the Record.
  The bill I am introducing today establishes a six-year program in the 
Office of the Secretary of Transportation to complete the development 
of the advanced transportation simulation model. The program will also 
support early deployment of computer software and graphics packages to 
federal agencies and states for national, regional, or statewide 
transportation planning. The bill authorizes a total of $50 million 
from the Highway Trust Fund for this effort. When completed, NATMAP 
will provide the nation a tool to help formulate and analyze critical 
transportation policy and investment options, including major 
infrastructure requirements and vulnerabilities within that 
infrastructure.
  Congress will soon take up the reauthorization of TEA-21, the six-
year transportation bill. I am introducing this bill today so my 
proposal can be fully considered by the Senate's Environment and Public 
Works Committee and by the Administration as the next authorization 
bill is being developed. I look forward to working with Senator Inhofe, 
the Chairman of the EPW Committee, and Senator Jeffords, the ranking 
member, as well as Senator Bond, the Chairman of the Transportation, 
Infrastructure, and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee and Senator Reid, the 
ranking member, to incorporate this bill in the reauthorization of TEA-
21.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                 S. 354

       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 ``National Transportation 
     Modeling and Analysis Program Establishment Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Advanced model.--The term ``advanced model'' means the 
     advanced transportation simulation model developed under the 
     National Transportation Network and Analysis Capability 
     Program.
       (2) Program.--The term ``Program'' means the National 
     Transportation Modeling and Analysis Program established 
     under section 3.
       (3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Transportation.

     SEC. 3. ESTABLISHMENT OF PROGRAM.

       The Secretary of Transportation shall establish a program, 
     to be known as the ``National Transportation Modeling and 
     Analysis Program''--
       (1) to complete the advanced model; and
       (2) to support early deployment of computer software and 
     graphics packages for the advanced model to agencies of the 
     Federal Government and to States for national, regional, or 
     statewide transportation planning.

     SEC. 4. SCOPE OF PROGRAM.

       The Program shall provide for a simulation of the national 
     transportation infrastructure as a single, integrated system 
     that--
       (1) incorporates models of--
       (A) each major transportation mode, including--
       (i) highways;
       (ii) air traffic;
       (iii) railways;
       (iv) inland waterways;
       (v) seaports;
       (vi) pipelines; and
       (vii) other intermodal connections; and
       (B) passenger traffic and freight traffic;
       (2) is resolved to the level of individual transportation 
     vehicles, including trucks, trains, vessels, and aircraft;
       (3) relates traffic flows to issues of economics, the 
     environment, national security, energy, and safety;
       (4) analyzes the effect on the United States transportation 
     system of Mexican and Canadian trucks operating in the United 
     States; and
       (5) examines the effects of various security procedures and 
     regulations on cargo flow at ports of entry.

     SEC. 5. ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES.

       Under the Program, the Secretary shall--
       (1) complete the advanced model;
       (2) develop user-friendly advanced transportation modeling 
     computer software and graphics packages;
       (3) provide training and technical assistance with respect 
     to the implementation and application of the advanced model 
     to Federal agencies and to States for use in national, 
     regional, or statewide transportation planning; and
       (4) allocate funds to not more than 3 entities described in 
     paragraph (3), representing diverse applications and 
     geographic regions, to carry out pilot programs to 
     demonstrate use of the advanced model for national, regional, 
     or statewide transportation planning.

     SEC. 6. FUNDING.

       (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated 
     from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit 
     Account) to carry out this Act--
       (1) $6,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
       (2) $7,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
       (3) $9,000,000 for fiscal year 2006;
       (4) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;
       (5) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2008; and
       (6) $8,000,000 for fiscal year 2009.
       (b) Allocation of Funds.--
       (1) Fiscal years 2004 and 2005.--For each of fiscal years 
     2004 and 2005, 100 percent of the funds made available under 
     subsection (a) shall be used to carry out activities 
     described in paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 5.
       (2) Fiscal years 2006 through 2009.--For each of fiscal 
     years 2006 through 2009, not more than 50 percent of the 
     funds made available under subsection (a) may be used to 
     carry out activities described in section 5(4).
       (c) Contract Authority.--Funds authorized under this 
     section shall be available for obligation in the same manner 
     as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, 
     United States Code, except that the Federal share of the cost 
     of--
       (1) any activity described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) of 
     section 5 shall be 100 percent; and
       (2) any activity described in section 5(4) shall not exceed 
     80 percent.
       (d) Availability of Funds.--Funds made available under this 
     section shall be available to the Secretary through the 
     Transportation Planning, Research, and Development Account of 
     the Office of the Secretary of Transportation.
                                  ____



                              The Secretary of Transportation,

                                   Washington, DC., April 9, 2002.
     Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Jeff: Thank you for your letter of January 30 
     expressing your strong support to continue the development of 
     the National Transportation Network Analysis Capability 
     (NTNAC). The U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) Office 
     of Policy and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) have 
     been working closely with Los Alamos National Laboratory to 
     develop this tool.
       During 1998, Los Alamos National Laboratory developed a 
     prototype NTNAC with funding provided by the DOT ($50,000 
     from

[[Page S2213]]

     the Office of the Secretary's Transportation Policy 
     Development Office), the U.S. Department of Defense 
     (TRANSCOM's Military Transportation Management Command), and 
     the Laboratory's own internal research and development 
     program. This effort demonstrated the technical feasibility 
     of building a national transportation network that can 
     simulate the movements of individual carriers (trucks, 
     trains, planes, water vessels, and pipelines) and individual 
     freight shippers.
       During 1999, FHWA provided $750,000 to further develop 
     NTNAC and to complete the study ``National Transportation 
     Impact of Latin American Trade Flows.''
       The DOT agrees that NTNAC shows great promise of producing 
     a tool that would be useful for analyzing the national 
     transportation system as a single, integrated system. We 
     agree that NTNAC would provide DOT with important new 
     capabilities to assess and formulate critical policy and 
     investment options and to help address homeland security and 
     vulnerabilities in the Nation's transportation network.
       However, the Department's budget is very limited. It would 
     be difficult to find funding to continue the project this 
     year. If funding should become available, we will give 
     priority consideration to continuing the NTNAC development 
     effort.
       Again, I very much appreciate your thoughts on the 
     importance of continuing the development of NTNAC. If I can 
     provide further information or assistance, please fell free 
     to call me.
           Sincerely yours,
                                                 Normal Y. Mineta.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Hagel, Mr. 
        Dayton, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Coleman and Mr. Johnson):
  S. 355. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a 
credit for biodiesel fuel; to the Committee on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Mr. Bond, and Mr. Talent):
  S. 356. A bill to amend the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to increase the 
allowable credit for biodiesel use under the alternatively fueled 
vehicle purchase requirement; to the Committee on energy and Natural 
Resources.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Kerry, and Mr. 
        Smith):
  S. 357. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 
the credit for the production of fuel from nonconventional sources to 
include production of fuel from agricultural and animal waste; to the 
Committee on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN:
  S. 358. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 
the credit for the production of fuel from nonconventional sources for 
the production of electricity to include landfill gas; to the Committee 
on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself and Mr. Akaka):
  S. 359. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 
the credit for the production of electricity to include electricity 
produced from municipal solid waste; to the Committee on Finance.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN:
  S. 360. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to treat 
natural gas distribution lines as 10-year property for depreciation 
purposes; to the Committee on Finance
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Mr. Allard, Mr. Grassley, Mr. 
        Harkin, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Levin, and Mr. DeWine):
  S. 361. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow 
for an energy efficient appliance credit; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce my package of 
alternative energy and energy efficiency bills. These bills all work in 
concert toward a single goal--promoting the use of cleaner, renewable 
energy for this nation.
  For several decades, the U.S. has relied on foreign sources of energy 
supply. Worldwide demand for energy has continued to increase, while 
our domestic resource base has decreased, leaving the country 
vulnerable in the event of foreign supply disruptions. This year, the 
U.S. will import 60 percent of its crude oil needs this year. The 
events of September 11th have focused attention on the need to develop 
a new energy policy that focuses on creating new domestic sources. Our 
Nation needs to explore and develop all possible domestic options as 
resources for our energy supply. To reduce our dependence on foreign 
imports, it is imperative that policy makers create incentives to 
promote technologies that can produce quality alternative products. Our 
national security demands that the government undertake programs which 
assure the implementation of real alternative fuel technologies.
  It is in the best security interests of our Nation to reduce our 
reliance on foreign energy suppliers. We can no longer afford to be 
subject to the whims and manipulations of foreign cartels like OPEC. 
Added to these threats posed by OPEC and the instability of the Middle 
East are the even more sinister possibilities that we face in other 
parts of the world. Developments in many regions of the world where 
much of today's energy supplies are obtained--West Africa, the Caspian 
Sea, Indonesia, Venezuela, and so forth--clearly serve notice that our 
Nation cannot continue to depend on these areas for our future energy 
needs. These events make it more pressing than ever that we proceed 
forward with the development of our own domestic alternative energy 
resources.
  In the last Congress, both the House and the Senate passed 
comprehensive energy bills that would have brought us closer to these 
goals. In the Senate bill, we were able to strike a delicate balance 
between using our resources for energy and preserving our environment 
for future generations. I was pleased with the Senate version of the 
Energy Policy Act of 2002, and was disappointed that conferees were 
unable to iron out differences with the House of Representatives before 
adjournment. We must make energy independence a national priority 
because it is now essential to our homeland security.
  Looking ahead, I will continue my work to build a cohesive national 
energy policy that ultimately reduces our dependence on foreign oil. To 
accomplish this goal, we must provide access to more resources, 
transmit these resources to the consumer, and encourage industrial and 
individual consumers to use more renewable energy sources. These 
important steps will lead to greater reliability and lower energy costs 
for consumers.
  We should all work again in the 108th Congress to adopt a 
comprehensive energy plan that sets America on the road to energy 
independence and assures consumers of a reliable and affordable energy 
supply.
  The legislation I am introducing today will encourage production of 
biodiesel and its use in this country; to promote the manufacture of 
energy efficient home appliances; to encourage the use of fuels 
produced from animal and agricultural wastes; to encourage the use of 
our waste sources such as landfill gas and municipal solid waste to 
produce energy; and to spur the investment in delivering fuels to rural 
America. These incentives for production and use of clean and renewable 
fuels can help bridge the investment cost gap between production of 
petroleum and renewable energy.
  Each of these bills were either included or debated in the Senate 
during last year's Senate consideration and passage of the energy bill. 
I look forward to their inclusion in the debate and inclusion in any 
energy bill to be passed by the Senate during the 108th Congress.
  The first bill I am introducing today is the Biodiesel Promotion Act 
of 2003. I am pleased to be joined in introducing this bill by Senators 
Grassley, Hagel, Dayton, Harkin, Durbin, Coleman, and Johnson. This 
legislation will provide tax incentives for the production of biodiesel 
from agricultural oils, recycled oils, and animal fats and will ensure 
that biodiesel becomes a central component of this nation's automobile 
fuel market.
  This legislation is identical to language authored by myself and 
Senator Grassley included in the last Congress's Energy Bill. It is 
intended to be a starting point for our debate and discussion as we 
draft an energy bill for consideration in this Congress.
  This legislation will provide a partial exemption from the diesel 
excise tax for diesel blended with biodiesel. Specifically, the bill 
provides a one-cent reduction for every percent of biodiesel from 
virgin agricultural oils blended

[[Page S2214]]

with diesel up to 20 percent. The legislation will also provide a half-
cent reduction for every percent of biodiesel from recycled 
agricultural oils or animal fats.
  Also importantly, in the year that we are to reauthorize the 
Transportation Enhancement Act of 1996, the bill provides for 
reimbursing the Highway Trust Fund from the USDA Commodity Credit 
Corporation, CCC. This procedure will protect the Trust Fund from lost 
revenues due to the biodiesel incentive while providing a much-needed 
boost to our nation's biodiesel industry. The cost to the CCC would be 
offset at least initially by the savings under the marketing loan 
program.
  Biodiesel, which can be made from just about any agricultural oil 
including oils from soybeans, cottonseed, or rice, is completely 
renewable, contains no petroleum, and can be easily blended with 
petroleum diesel. A biodiesel-diesel blend typically contains up to 20 
percent renewable content. It can be added directly into the gas tank 
of a compression-ignition, diesel engine vehicle with no major 
modifications. Biodiesel is completely biodegradable and non-toxic, 
contains no sulfur, and it is the first and only alternative fuel to 
meet EPA's Tier I and II health effects testing standards. Biodiesel 
also stands ready to help us reach the EPA's new rule to reduce the 
sulfur content of highway diesel fuel by over 95 percent.
  Even after years of research and market development, biodiesel is not 
yet cost-competitive with petroleum diesel. In order to be so, market 
support and tax incentives are needed. I believe the provisions 
provided in this bill will help in leveling the field for biodiesel 
blends and help jumpstart this new industry.
  The time is right for this investment. It is right for our rural 
economy, for our environment, and for our national energy security and 
I encourage my colleagues to join us in supporting the Biodiesel 
Promotion Act of 2003.
  The second component of my package is the EPACT Alternative Fuel 
Flexibility Act of 2003. I am pleased to be joined today by Senators 
Bond and Talent in introducing this legislation.
  The purpose of this legislation is to place biodiesel fuel on equal 
footing with every other alternative motor fuel used in this nation.
  The Energy Policy Act of 1992, EPACT, set a national objective to 
shift the focus of national energy demand away from imported oil toward 
renewable and domestically produced energy sources. When EPACT was 
passed in 1992, it recognized ethanol, natural gas, propane, 
electricity, and methanol as alternative fuels. The original list of 
alternative fuels did not include biodiesel because the technology had 
not been fully developed.
  EPACT set a goal to replace 10 percent of petroleum-based fuels by 
2000 and 30 percent by the year 2010. However, a GAO report issued in 
July of 2001 noted that ``limited progress has been made in increasing 
the numbers of alternative fuel vehicles, AFV, in the national vehicle 
fleet and the use of alternative fuels'' as compared to conventional 
vehicles and fuels.
  We did not meet the original EPACT goals of replacing 10 percent of 
petroleum-based fuels by 2000. Today we are not on track to meet the 
goal of 30 percent by the year 2010. In fact, we haven't even come 
close, and that's partly a result of not allowing all alternative fuels 
to be used to meet the EPACT alternative fuel mandates.
  This legislation will significantly increase the use of alternative 
fuels by allowing EPACT covered fleets to meet up to 100 percent of the 
EPACT purchase requirements through the use of biodiesel. Currently, 
covered fleets can only meet up to 50 percent of purchase requirements 
with biodiesel.
  By offering an additional option for the use of alternative fuels, we 
will widen the possibilities for these fuels to be made more widely 
available. Fleets will continue to have the option to choose the 
complying vehicles and fuels that best meet their needs. This 
legislation is not expected to affect fleets that are currently using 
ethanol or natural gas. But this legislation does provide a further 
option for alternative fuel vehicles. Furthermore, it does not directly 
displace natural gas or ethanol sales, since biodiesel is used in 
medium- and heavy-duty trucks rather than light-duty vehicles.
  By allowing fleets to meet 100 percent of their AFV requirement by 
using biodiesel, we'll take a positive step toward moving this country 
away from dependence on petroleum-based motor fuels and toward 
alternative motor fuels. I urge all of my colleagues to support this 
legislation.
  The third bill I introduce today as part of my energy independence 
package is the Animal and Agricultural Waste Renewable Energy 
Production Act of 2003. I am pleased to be joined today by Senators 
Hagel, Bond, and Kerry in introducing this legislation.
  This legislation would provide a credit under Section 29 of the tax 
code for the production of fuels from animal and agricultural wastes.
  Thanks to new technological developments, we can now produce 
significant quantities of alternative fuels from agricultural and 
animal wastes in an environmentally friendly manner. Production 
incentives are needed to assure implementation and commercialization of 
this new generation of technology.
  Section 29 was originally enacted to provide an incentive to produce 
alternative and hard-to-reach fuels that could compete with fossil 
fuels and hopefully reduce the nation's dependence on foreign oil. As 
originally enacted, a number of ``non-conventional fuels'' were 
eligible for the credit, including the following: oil from shale; oil 
from tar sands; natural gas from geo-pressured brine, coal seams, 
Devonian shale, or tight sands; liquid, gaseous or solid synthetic fuel 
from coal, including coke and coke by-products; gas from biomass, 
including wood; steam from solid agricultural by-products; and 
processed solid wood fuels.
  Other biomass by-products, such as agricultural and animal oils and 
solids, also should qualify the same as liquid or gaseous synthetic 
fuels derived from coal.
  New technological advances have been developed which will convert 
these biomass wastes efficiently to alternative fuels. The most readily 
available of these wastes are agricultural and animal wastes, municipal 
wastes, plastics, used tires, and forest product wastes. This 
production incentive opportunity would provide significant new annual 
quantities of alternative fuel to replace foreign imported oil and 
should be considered a government investment in the nation's future.
  If these incentives are implemented, large marketable quantities of 
quality alternative fuel products can be produced as a replacement for 
foreign imported oil. These processes can achieve the desired results 
in an environmentally positive way that essentially converts all wastes 
to products and provides an answer for waste disposal problems. To 
achieve these results, financial incentives need be provided from the 
government. Section 29 should be extended to include alternative fuels 
produced from all biomass wastes and I encourage all of my colleagues 
to join us in supporting this legislation.
  The fourth bill I am introducing today is the Capturing Landfill Gas 
for Energy Act of 2003. This legislation will provide a credit under 
either Section 29 or Section 45 of the tax code for the production of 
energy from landfill gas, LFG. It is designed to encourage additional 
collection and productive use of methane gas generated by garbage 
decomposing in America's landfills. LFG is a renewable fuel that can be 
used directly as an energy source for heating, as a clean burning 
vehicle fuel, as a hydrogen source for fuel cells. Furthermore, it can 
power generators to produce electricity.
  Congress recognized the importance of LFG for energy diversity and 
national security by providing such a credit in 1980 and extending it 
for nearly two decades. With today's critical energy needs and emphasis 
on distributed generation, this incentive makes more sense than ever. 
Most of the 360 LFG projects that currently are operating were made 
economically feasible by the ``non-conventional-source fuel'' 
production tax credit under Section 29 of the tax code.
  But since June 30, 1998, that credit to encourage construction of new 
LFG projects has been unavailable, and few have been constructed since 
that date. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 600-
700 more LFG projects could be constructed nationwide if there were 
sufficient economic incentives in place to foster

[[Page S2215]]

their development. With such incentives, it is likely that about 55 new 
projects would be brought on line each year. Just one medium-sized 
project could provide three megawatts of electrical power capacity--
enough to meet the electricity needs of 3,000 homes each year.
  In addition to the value of LFG as an important contribution to our 
overall energy strategy, there are compelling environmental reasons to 
encourage these projects. Uncontrolled landfill gas can create fire 
hazards and odors and can impair air quality. The methane in landfill 
gas is 21 times more potent than carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. 
Even the large landfills that are required under the Clean Air Act to 
collect their gas and control non-methane organic compounds often find 
it more economic to simply flare or otherwise waste the gas rather than 
use the methane. Some smaller landfills are not required to collect the 
gas, and may continue to emit it for decades under the Clean Air Act. 
Thus, LFG projects not only reduce local and regional air pollution 
while yielding a renewable source of energy, they can also reduce the 
country's yearly emissions of greenhouse gases by a very substantial 
amount at a relatively small cost.
  Unfortunately, the potential energy and environmental benefits of 
future LFG projects are substantial, but they will be lost without 
adequate LFG tax provisions to support project development. On average, 
the total capital cost of constructing an LFG-fueled electricity 
generating project is about $1 million per megawatt, and the annual 
operating and maintenance costs average another $150,000 per megawatt. 
The average capital cost of a new direct use fuel production and 
delivery project is about $2.5 million, with annual operation and 
maintenance costs of about $350,000.
  My bill proposes sufficient, yet sensible, tax incentives to 
encourage these large investments, and I urge my colleagues to join me 
and support LFG tax credits.
  Today I am also pleased to be joined by Senator Akaka in introducing 
the fifth component of my energy package--the Waste to Energy 
Utilization Act of 2003. This legislation will provide a credit under 
Section 45 of the tax code for new waste-to-energy facilities or new 
generating units at existing facilities. Such a tax credit encourages 
clean renewable electricity and promotes energy diversity, while 
helping cities meet the challenge of trash disposal.
  Nearly 2000 communities nationwide rely on waste-to-energy facilities 
to safely dispose of trash and generate clean, renewable energy that 
meets the power need of more than two and a half million homes. The 
U.S. Conference of Mayors has repeatedly urged Congress to include 
provisions that promote waste-to-energy in tax legislation and they are 
joined by the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, 
the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, the U.S. Chamber of 
Commerce, and the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers.
  Arkansas stands with other environmentally conscious States in 
understanding that waste-to-energy technology saves valuable land and 
significantly reduces the amount of greenhouse gases that would have 
been released into our atmosphere without its operation. The volume of 
waste is reduced by greater than 90 percent in a waste-to-energy 
facility, and EPA has confirmed that more than 33 million tons of 
greenhouse gases are avoided annually by the combustion of municipal 
solid waste. Municipal solid waste is a sustainable source of clean, 
renewable energy.
  Local governments spent about $1 billion over the past five years on 
air pollution control equipment to comply with EPA's Maximum Achievable 
Control Technology, MACT, standards required under the Clean Air Act. 
These retrofits have made waste-to-energy one of the cleanest power 
generators in the country. In June, EPA announced that these facilities 
have shown ``outstanding performance'' resulting in ``dramatic 
decreases'' in emissions, resulting in reductions of mercury emissions 
of more than 95 percent from a decade ago. Communities with waste-to-
energy facilities recycle 33 percent of their trash, on average, and 
historically have more successful recycling programs than cities 
without waste-to-energy plants.
  We must sustain a level marketplace to achieve energy diversity and 
economic growth. I believe this Senate should pass tax legislation that 
includes production tax credits to spur energy generation, and I 
encourage all of my colleagues to join us and support this legislation.
  The sixth bill I introduce today is the Resource Efficient Appliance 
Incentives Act of 2003. I am pleased to be joined in introducing this 
bill by Senators Allard, Grassley, Harkin, Stabenow, Hagel, Levin, and 
DeWine. 
  This legislation will provide a tax credit for the production of 
super energy-efficient clothes washers and refrigerators if those 
appliances exceed new Federal energy efficiency standards. The tax 
credit would only be available for five years and would be capped for 
each manufacturer.
  In 2001, the Department of Energy issued new energy efficiency 
standards for clothes washers. This agreement accompanies rules for 
higher efficiency refrigerators issued by the department two years ago. 
The new rules are significant because clothes washers, clothes dryers, 
and refrigerators account for approximately 15 percent of all household 
energy consumed in the U.S. annually. The tax incentives contained in 
this legislation are constructed to encourage manufacturers not only to 
exceed these new efficiency requirements, but to exceed them by up to 
35 percent.
  Tax incentives are essential to accelerate the production and market 
penetration of leading-edge appliance technologies that create 
significant environmental benefits. The need for super energy-efficient 
appliances is greater this year than at any time in the past 20 years. 
Over the life of the appliances, over 200 trillion BTUs of energy will 
be saved. This is the equivalent of taking 2.3 million cars off the 
road or making available for other uses the energy of six coal-fired 
power plants for a year.
  In addition, the clothes washers will reduce the amount of water 
necessary to wash clothes by 870 billion gallons, an amount equal to 
the needs of every household in a city the size of Phoenix, Arizona for 
two years. The water savings attributable to these new technology 
machines is not based on some computer generated model but an actual 
case study that gathered data in the small community of Bern, KS by the 
Dept. of Energy's esteemed Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1998.
  The Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers estimates these super 
energy-efficient appliances could save the average family $100 per 
year--or $1,400 per family over the lifetime of the appliance. This 
legislation will create the incentives necessary to increase the 
production and sale of these super energy-efficient appliances in the 
short term while passing along energy savings to the American consumer.
  As a DOE analysis indicates, high efficiency washers and 
refrigerators are significantly more expensive to manufacture than 
those that simply meet existing federal standards. Further, market 
surveys of consumers indicate that they are generally not willing to 
pay more for high efficiency appliances, even when it can be 
demonstrated that high efficiency appliances will generate greater 
savings in utility costs over time. The tax credit will provide an 
incentive for manufacturers to develop a greater selection of super 
efficient models that will appeal to consumers at all price points. In 
addition, to assure increased sales of these appliances, manufacturers 
will be encouraged to redirect their marketing and advertising 
resources toward the high efficiency models. Enactment of this 
legislation will bring immediate, significant, and lasting 
environmental benefits to the nation, and I encourage all of my 
colleagues to join us in supporting in this effort.
  The final bill I am introducing today is the Gas Distribution 
Infrastructure Investment Act of 2003. This legislation will amend the 
Internal Revenue Code to modify the depreciation of natural gas 
pipelines, equipment, and infrastructure assets from 20 to 10 years.
  America's demand for energy is expected to grow by 32 percent during 
the next 20 years. Consumer demand for natural gas will grow at almost 
twice that rate, due to its economic, environmental, and operational 
benefits. That level of natural gas use is almost 60

[[Page S2216]]

percent greater than the highest recorded level. To satisfy this 
projected demand, we must substantially expand our existing gas 
infrastructure. This is especially true with respect to the delivery 
sector. Higher capacity utilization of existing infrastructure will 
meet some of this increased demand, but the delivery sector still will 
require capital investments of at least $123 billion for infrastructure 
enhancement and additions.
  Shrinking the lifetime over which an asset is depreciated does not 
change the amount of expense a company is allowed to claim over the 
asset's useful life, but simply shortens the expensing period for tax 
purposes. This shortened tax life generates higher cash flows in terms 
of reduced tax liability during the asset's early useful lifetime. 
Conversely, the cash flows are decreased, relative to the longer 
depreciation life, during the later part of the asset's useful life. 
The overall impact is zero on a gross basis.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. 
Infrastructure development and expansion is crucial if America's homes 
are to continue to rely on clean-burning natural gas to heat their 
homes and fuel their appliances.
  I ask unanimous consent that each of the seven bills I am introducing 
today be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bills were ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 355

       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 ``Biodiesel Promotion Act of 
     2003''.

     SEC. 2. INCENTIVES FOR BIODIESEL.

       (a) Credit for Biodiesel Used as a Fuel.--
       (1) In general.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     business related credits) is amended by inserting after 
     section 40 the following new section:

     ``SEC. 40A. BIODIESEL USED AS FUEL.

       ``(a) General Rule.--For purposes of section 38, the 
     biodiesel fuels credit determined under this section for the 
     taxable year is an amount equal to the biodiesel mixture 
     credit.
       ``(b) Definition of Biodiesel Mixture Credit.--For purposes 
     of this section--
       ``(1) Biodiesel mixture credit.--
       ``(A) In general.--The biodiesel mixture credit of any 
     taxpayer for any taxable year is the sum of the products of 
     the biodiesel mixture rate for each qualified biodiesel 
     mixture and the number of gallons of such mixture of the 
     taxpayer for the taxable year.
       ``(B) Biodiesel mixture rate.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), the biodiesel mixture rate for each qualified biodiesel 
     mixture shall be--
       ``(i) in the case of a mixture with only biodiesel V, 1 
     cent for each whole percentage point (not exceeding 20 
     percentage points) of biodiesel V in such mixture, and
       ``(ii) in the case of a mixture with biodiesel NV, or a 
     combination of biodiesel V and biodiesel NV, 0.5 cent for 
     each whole percentage point (not exceeding 20 percentage 
     points) of such biodiesel in such mixture.
       ``(2) Qualified biodiesel mixture.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified biodiesel mixture' 
     means a mixture of diesel and biodiesel V or biodiesel NV 
     which--
       ``(i) is sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any 
     person for use as a fuel, or
       ``(ii) is used as a fuel by the taxpayer producing such 
     mixture.
       ``(B) Sale or use must be in trade or business, etc.--
       ``(i) In general.--Biodiesel V or biodiesel NV used in the 
     production of a qualified biodiesel mixture shall be taken 
     into account--

       ``(I) only if the sale or use described in subparagraph (A) 
     is in a trade or business of the taxpayer, and
       ``(II) for the taxable year in which such sale or use 
     occurs.

       ``(ii) Certification for biodiesel v.--Biodiesel V used in 
     the production of a qualified biodiesel mixture shall be 
     taken into account only if the taxpayer described in 
     subparagraph (A) obtains a certification from the producer of 
     the biodiesel V which identifies the product produced.
       ``(C) Casual off-farm production not eligible.--No credit 
     shall be allowed under this section with respect to any 
     casual off-farm production of a qualified biodiesel mixture.
       ``(c) Coordination With Exemption From Excise Tax.--The 
     amount of the credit determined under this section with 
     respect to any biodiesel V shall, under regulations 
     prescribed by the Secretary, be properly reduced to take into 
     account any benefit provided with respect to such biodiesel V 
     solely by reason of the application of section 4041(n) or 
     section 4081(f).
       ``(d) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this 
     section--
       ``(1) Biodiesel v defined.--The term `biodiesel V' means 
     the monoalkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived solely 
     from virgin vegetable oils for use in compressional-ignition 
     (diesel) engines. Such term shall include esters derived from 
     vegetable oils from corn, soybeans, sunflower seeds, 
     cottonseeds, canola, crambe, rapeseeds, safflowers, 
     flaxseeds, rice bran, and mustard seeds.
       ``(2) Biodiesel nv defined.--The term `biodiesel NV' means 
     the monoalkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from 
     nonvirgin vegetable oils or animal fats for use in 
     compressional-ignition (diesel) engines.
       ``(3) Registration requirements.--The terms `biodiesel V' 
     and `biodiesel NV' shall only include a biodiesel which 
     meets--
       ``(i) the registration requirements for fuels and fuel 
     additives established by the Environmental Protection Agency 
     under section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545), and
       ``(ii) the requirements of the American Society of Testing 
     and Materials D6751.
       ``(4) Biodiesel mixture not used as a fuel, etc.--
       ``(A) Imposition of tax.--If--
       ``(i) any credit was determined under this section with 
     respect to biodiesel V or biodiesel NV used in the production 
     of any qualified biodiesel mixture, and
       ``(ii) any person--

       ``(I) separates such biodiesel from the mixture, or
       ``(II) without separation, uses the mixture other than as a 
     fuel,

     then there is hereby imposed on such person a tax equal to 
     the product of the biodiesel mixture rate applicable under 
     subsection (b)(1)(B) and the number of gallons of the 
     mixture.
       ``(B) Applicable laws.--All provisions of law, including 
     penalties, shall, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent 
     with this section, apply in respect of any tax imposed under 
     subparagraph (A) as if such tax were imposed by section 4081 
     and not by this chapter.
       ``(5) Pass-thru in the case of estates and trusts.--Under 
     regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the 
     rules of subsection (d) of section 52 shall apply.
       ``(e) Election To Have Biodiesel Fuels Credit Not Apply.--
       ``(1) In general.--A taxpayer may elect to have this 
     section not apply for any taxable year.
       ``(2) Time for making election.--An election under 
     paragraph (1) for any taxable year may be made (or revoked) 
     at any time before the expiration of the 3-year period 
     beginning on the last date prescribed by law for filing the 
     return for such taxable year (determined without regard to 
     extensions).
       ``(3) Manner of making election.--An election under 
     paragraph (1) (or revocation thereof) shall be made in such 
     manner as the Secretary may by regulations prescribe.
       ``(f) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any 
     fuel sold after December 31, 2005.''.
       (2) Credit treated as part of general business credit.--
     Section 38(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 
     by striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (14), by 
     striking the period at the end of paragraph (15) and 
     inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(16) the biodiesel fuels credit determined under section 
     40A(a).''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 39(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(11) No carryback of biodiesel fuels credit before 
     january 1, 2003.--No portion of the unused business credit 
     for any taxable year which is attributable to the biodiesel 
     fuels credit determined under section 40A may be carried back 
     to a taxable year beginning before January 1, 2003.''.
       (B) Section 196(c) of such Code is amended by striking 
     ``and'' at the end of paragraph (9), by striking the period 
     at the end of paragraph (10), and by adding at the end the 
     following new paragraph:
       ``(11) the biodiesel fuels credit determined under section 
     40A(a).''.
       (C) Section 6501(m) of such Code is amended by inserting 
     ``40A(e),'' after ``40(f),''.
       (D) The table of sections for subpart D of part IV of 
     subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code is amended by adding 
     after the item relating to section 40 the following new item:

``Sec. 40A. Biodiesel used as fuel.''.

       (4) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2002.
       (b) Reduction of Motor Fuel Excise Taxes on Biodiesel V 
     Mixtures.--
       (1) In general.--Section 4081 of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 (relating to manufacturers tax on petroleum products) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(f) Biodiesel V Mixtures.--Under regulations prescribed 
     by the Secretary--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of the removal or entry of a 
     qualified biodiesel mixture with biodiesel V, the rate of tax 
     under subsection (a) shall be the otherwise applicable rate 
     reduced by the biodiesel mixture rate (if any) applicable to 
     the mixture.
       ``(2) Tax prior to mixing.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of the removal or entry of 
     diesel fuel for use in producing at the time of such removal 
     or entry a qualified biodiesel mixture with biodiesel V, the 
     rate of tax under subsection (a) shall be the rate determined 
     under subparagraph (B).
       ``(B) Determination of rate.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A), the rate determined under this subparagraph is the rate 
     determined under paragraph (1), divided by a

[[Page S2217]]

     percentage equal to 100 percent minus the percentage of 
     biodiesel V which will be in the mixture.
       ``(3) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection, any 
     term used in this subsection which is also used in section 
     40A shall have the meaning given such term by section 40A.
       ``(4) Certain rules to apply.--Rules similar to the rules 
     of paragraphs (6) and (7) of subsection (c) shall apply for 
     purposes of this subsection.''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Section 4041 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(n) Biodiesel V Mixtures.--Under regulations prescribed 
     by the Secretary, in the case of the sale or use of a 
     qualified biodiesel mixture (as defined in section 40A(b)(2)) 
     with biodiesel V, the rates under paragraphs (1) and (2) of 
     subsection (a) shall be the otherwise applicable rates, 
     reduced by any applicable biodiesel mixture rate (as defined 
     in section 40A(b)(1)(B)).''.
       (B) Section 6427 of such Code is amended by redesignating 
     subsection (p) as subsection (q) and by inserting after 
     subsection (o) the following new subsection:
       ``(p) Biodiesel V Mixtures.--Except as provided in 
     subsection (k), if any diesel fuel on which tax was imposed 
     by section 4081 at a rate not determined under section 
     4081(f) is used by any person in producing a qualified 
     biodiesel mixture (as defined in section 40A(b)(2)) with 
     biodiesel V which is sold or used in such person's trade or 
     business, the Secretary shall pay (without interest) to such 
     person an amount equal to the per gallon applicable biodiesel 
     mixture rate (as defined in section 40A(b)(1)(B)) with 
     respect to such fuel.''.
       (3) Effective date.--The amendments made by this subsection 
     shall apply to any fuel sold after December 31, 2002, and 
     before January 1, 2006.
       (c) Highway Trust Fund Held Harmless.--There are hereby 
     transferred (from time to time) from the funds of the 
     Commodity Credit Corporation amounts determined by the 
     Secretary of the Treasury to be equivalent to the reductions 
     that would occur (but for this subsection) in the receipts of 
     the Highway Trust Fund by reason of the amendments made by 
     this section.

                                 S. 356

       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 ``EPACT Alternative Fuel 
     Flexibility Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. BIODIESEL FUEL USE CREDITS.

       Section 312(b) of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (42 U.S.C. 
     13220(b)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``(b) Use of Credits.--'' and all that 
     follows through ``At the request'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(b) Use of Credits.--At the request''; and
       (2) by striking paragraph (2).

                                 S. 357

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

     SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF CREDIT FOR PRODUCTION OF FUEL FROM 
                   NONCONVENTIONAL SOURCES TO INCLUDE PRODUCTION 
                   OF FUEL FROM AGRICULTURAL AND ANIMAL WASTE.

       (a) In General.--Section 29(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to definition of qualified fuels) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B)(ii),
       (2) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) 
     and inserting ``, and'', and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) liquid, gaseous, or solid fuels from qualified 
     agricultural and animal waste, including such fuels when used 
     as feedstocks.''.
       (b) Qualified Agricultural and Animal Waste.--
       (1) In general.--Section 29(c) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) Qualified agricultural and animal waste.--The term 
     `qualified agricultural and animal waste' means agriculture 
     and animal waste, including by-products, packaging, and any 
     materials associated with the processing, feeding, selling, 
     transporting, or disposal of agricultural or animal products 
     or wastes, including wood shavings, straw, rice hulls, and 
     other bedding for the disposition of manure.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 29(c)(3) of such Code is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A),
       (B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (B) 
     and inserting ``, and'', and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(C) qualified agricultural and animal waste.''.
       (c) Extension of Credit.--Section 29(g) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to extension for certain 
     facilities) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) Facilities producing fuels from agricultural and 
     animal waste.--In the case of facility for producing 
     qualified fuels described in subsection (c)(1)(D)--
       ``(A) for purposes of subsection (f)(1)(B), such facility 
     shall be treated as being placed in service before January 1, 
     1993, if such facility is placed in service after January 1, 
     2003, and before January 1, 2008, and
       ``(B) if such facility is originally placed in service 
     after December 31, 1992, paragraph (2) of subsection (f) 
     shall be applied with respect to such facility by 
     substituting `January 1, 2018' for `January 1, 2003'.''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to fuels sold after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

                                 S. 358

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

     SECTION 1. CREDIT FOR PRODUCING FUEL FROM LANDFILL GAS.

       (a) In General.--Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 (relating to credit for producing fuel from a 
     nonconventional source) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new subsection:
       ``(h) Extension and Modification for Facilities Producing 
     Qualified Fuels From Landfill Gas.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of a facility for producing 
     qualified fuel from landfill gas which is placed in service 
     after June 30, 1998, and before January 1, 2008, this section 
     shall apply to fuel produced at such facility during the 5-
     year period beginning on the later of--
       ``(A) the date such facility was placed in service, or
       ``(B) the date of the enactment of this subsection.
       ``(2) Reduction of credit for production from certain 
     landfill gas facilities.--In the case of a facility to which 
     paragraph (1) applies which is located at a landfill which is 
     required pursuant to 40 CFR 60.752(b)(2) or 40 CFR 60.33c to 
     install and operate a collection and control system which 
     captures gas generated within the landfill, subsection (a)(1) 
     shall be applied to gas so captured by substituting `$2' for 
     `$3' for the taxable year during which such system is 
     required to be installed and operated.
       ``(3) Special rules.--In determining the amount of credit 
     allowable under this section solely by reason of this 
     subsection--
       ``(A) Daily limit.--The amount of qualified fuels sold 
     during any taxable year which may be taken into account by 
     reason of this subsection with respect to any facility shall 
     not exceed an average barrel-of-oil equivalent of 200,000 
     cubic feet of natural gas per day. Days before the date the 
     facility is placed in service shall not be taken into account 
     in determining such average.
       ``(B) Extension period to commence with unadjusted credit 
     amount.--In the case of fuels sold after 2003, subparagraph 
     (B) of subsection (d)(2) shall be applied by substituting 
     `2003' for `1979'.''.
       (b) Additional Definition.--Section 29(d) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to other definitions and 
     special rules) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(9) Landfill gas facility.--
       ``(A) In general.--A facility for producing qualified fuel 
     from landfill gas, placed in service before, on, or after the 
     date of the enactment of this paragraph, includes all wells, 
     pipes, and other gas collection equipment installed as part 
     of the facility over the life of the landfill, including any 
     modifications or expansions thereof, after the facility is 
     first placed in service.
       ``(B) Landfill gas.--The term `landfill gas' means gas 
     derived from the biodegradation of municipal solid waste.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to fuel sold after the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

     SEC. 2. EXTENSION AND EXPANSION OF CREDIT FOR PRODUCTION OF 
                   ELECTRICITY TO PRODUCTION FROM LANDFILL GAS.

       (a) In General.--Section 45(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (defining qualified energy resources) is amended 
     by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by 
     striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) and 
     inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(D) landfill gas.''.
       (b) Qualified Facility.--Section 45(c)(3) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to qualified facility) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) Landfill gas facility.--In the case of a facility 
     using landfill gas to produce electricity, the term 
     `qualified facility' means any such facility owned by the 
     taxpayer which is originally placed in service before January 
     1, 2008.''.
       (c) Special Rules and Definitions.--
       (1) Reduced credit for certain preefective date 
     facilities.--Section 45(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 (relating to definitions and special rules) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(8) Reduced credit for certain preeffective date 
     facilities.--In the case of any facility described in 
     subparagraph (D) of paragraph (3) which is placed in service 
     before the date of the enactment of this subparagraph--
       ``(A) subsection (a)(1) shall be applied by substituting 
     `1.0 cents' for `1.5 cents', and
       ``(B) the 5-year period beginning on the date of the 
     enactment of this paragraph shall be substituted in lieu of 
     the 10-year period in subsection (a)(2)(A)(ii).''.
       (2) Coordination with section 29.--Section 45(c)(3) of such 
     Code (relating to qualified facility), as amended by 
     subsection (b), is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(E) Coordination with section 29.--The term `qualified 
     facility' shall not include any facility the production from 
     which is taken

[[Page S2218]]

     into account in determining any credit under section 29 for 
     the taxable year or any prior taxable year.''.
       (3) Landfill gas.--Section 45(c) of such Code is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Landfill gas.--The term `landfill gas' means gas 
     derived from the biodegradation of municipal solid waste.''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to electricity sold after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

                                 S. 359

       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 ``Waste to Energy Utilization 
     Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCED FROM MUNICIPAL SOLID 
                   WASTE.

       (a) In General.--Section 45(c)(1) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (defining qualified energy resources) is amended 
     by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by 
     striking the period at the end of subparagraph (C) and 
     inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the end the following 
     new subparagraph:
       ``(D) municipal solid waste.''.
       (b) Qualified Facility.--Section 45(c)(3) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to qualified facility) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(D) Municipal solid waste facility.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of a facility or unit using 
     municipal solid waste to produce electricity, the term 
     `qualified facility' means--

       ``(I) any facility owned by the taxpayer which is 
     originally placed in service on or after date of the 
     enactment of this subparagraph and before January 1, 2008, or
       ``(II) any unit owned by the taxpayer which is originally 
     placed in service and added to another facility on or after 
     such date of enactment and before January 1, 2008.

       ``(ii) Special rule.--In the case of a qualified facility 
     described in clause (i)(II), the 10-year period referred to 
     in subsection (a) shall be treated as beginning no earlier 
     than the date of the enactment of this subparagraph.
       ``(iii) Credit eligibility.--In the case of any qualified 
     facility described in clause (i), if the owner of such 
     facility is not the producer of the electricity, the person 
     eligible for the credit allowable under subsection (a) is the 
     lessee or the operator of such facility.''.
       (c) Definition.--Section 45(c) of the Internal Revenue Code 
     of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(5) Municipal solid waste.--The term `municipal solid 
     waste' has the meaning given the term `solid waste' under 
     section 2(27) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 
     6903).''.
       (d) No Credit for Certain Production.--Section 45(d) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to definitions and 
     special rules) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(8) Operations inconsistent with solid waste disposal 
     act.--In the case of a qualified facility described in 
     subsection (c)(3)(D), subsection (a) shall not apply to 
     electricity produced at such facility during any taxable year 
     if, during a portion of such year, there is a certification 
     in effect by the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency that such facility was permitted in a 
     manner inconsistent with section 4003(d) of the Solid Waste 
     Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6943(d)).''.
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to electricity sold after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such 
     date.

                                 S. 360

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

     SECTION 1. NATURAL GAS DISTRIBUTION LINES TREATED AS 10-YEAR 
                   PROPERTY.

       (a) In General.--Subparagraph (D) of section 168(e)(3) of 
     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to classification 
     of certain property) is amended by striking ``and'' at the 
     end of clause (i), by striking the period at the end of 
     clause (ii) and by inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the 
     end the following new clause:
       ``(iii) any natural gas distribution line.''.
       (b) Alternative System.--The table contained in section 
     168(g)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 
     by inserting after the item relating to subparagraph (D)(ii) 
     the following:

``(D)(iii)........................................................20''.

       (c) Alternative Minimum Tax Exception.--Subparagraph (B) of 
     section 56(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 
     amended by inserting before the period the following: ``or in 
     clause (iii) of section 168(e)(3)(D)''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to property placed in service after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act.

                                 S. 361

       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 ``Resource Efficient Appliance 
     Incentives Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCES.

       (a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 
     business-related credits) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 45G. ENERGY EFFICIENT APPLIANCE CREDIT.

       ``(a) General Rule.--For purposes of section 38, the energy 
     efficient appliance credit determined under this section for 
     the taxable year is an amount equal to the applicable amount 
     determined under subsection (b) with respect to the eligible 
     production of qualified energy efficient appliances produced 
     by the taxpayer during the calendar year ending with or 
     within the taxable year.
       ``(b) Applicable Amount; Eligible Production.--For purposes 
     of subsection (a)--
       ``(1) Applicable amount.--The applicable amount is--
       ``(A) $50, in the case of--
       ``(i) a clothes washer which is produced in 2003 with at 
     least a 1.26 MEF (at least 1.42 MEF for washers produced 
     after 2003 but not after 2006), or
       ``(ii) a refrigerator produced in 2003 which consumes at 
     least 10 percent less kWh per year than the energy 
     conservation standards for refrigerators promulgated by the 
     Department of Energy effective July 1, 2001,
       ``(B) $100, in the case of--
       ``(i) a clothes washer which is produced in 2003 with at 
     least a 1.42 MEF (at least 1.5 MEF for washers produced after 
     2003 and before 2008), or
       ``(ii) a refrigerator produced after 2002 and before 2007 
     which consumes at least 15 percent less kWh per year (at 
     least 20 percent less kWh per year for refrigerators produced 
     in 2007) than such energy conservation standards, and
       ``(C) $150, in the case of a refrigerator which consumes at 
     least 20 percent less kWh per year than such energy 
     conservation standards and is produced after 2002 and before 
     2007.
       ``(2) Eligible production.--
       ``(A) In general.--The eligible production of each category 
     of qualified energy efficient appliances is the excess of--
       ``(i) the number of appliances in such category which are 
     produced by the taxpayer during such calendar year, over
       ``(ii) the average number of appliances in such category 
     which were produced by the taxpayer during calendar years 
     2000, 2001, and 2002.
       ``(B) Categories.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the 
     categories are--
       ``(i) clothes washers described in paragraph (1)(A)(i),
       ``(ii) clothes washers described in paragraph (1)(B)(i),
       ``(iii) refrigerators described in paragraph (1)(A)(ii),
       ``(iv) refrigerators described in paragraph (1)(B)(ii), and
       ``(v) refrigerators described in paragraph (1)(C).
       ``(C) Special rule for 2003 production.--For purposes of 
     determining eligible production for calendar year 2003--
       ``(i) only production after the date of enactment of this 
     section shall be taken into account under subparagraph 
     (A)(i), and
       ``(ii) the amount taken into account under subparagraph 
     (A)(ii) shall be an amount which bears the same ratio to the 
     amount which would (but for this subparagraph) be taken into 
     account under subparagraph (A)(ii) as--

       ``(I) the number of days in calendar year 2003 after the 
     date of enactment of this section, bears to
       ``(II) 365.

       ``(c) Limitation on Maximum Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--The maximum amount of credit allowed 
     under subsection (a) with respect to a taxpayer for all 
     taxable years shall be $60,000,000 except that not more than 
     $30,000,000 shall be allowed for production of any 
     combination of clothes washers produced with a 1.26 MEF 
     (described in subsection (b)(1)(A)(i)) and refrigerators 
     described in subsection (b)(1)(A)(ii).
       ``(2) Limitation based on gross receipts.--The credit 
     allowed under subsection (a) with respect to a taxpayer for 
     the taxable year shall not exceed an amount equal to 2 
     percent of the average annual gross receipts of the taxpayer 
     for the 3 taxable years preceding the taxable year in which 
     the credit is determined.
       ``(3) Gross receipts.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     rules of paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 448(c) shall 
     apply.
       ``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) Qualified energy efficient appliance.--The term 
     `qualified energy efficient appliance' means--
       ``(A) a clothes washer described in subparagraph (A)(i) or 
     (B)(i) of subsection (b)(1), or
       ``(B) a refrigerator described in subparagraph (A)(ii), 
     (B)(ii) or (C) of subsection (b)(1).
       ``(2) Clothes washer.--The term `clothes washer' means a 
     residential clothes washer, including a residential style 
     coin operated washer.
       ``(3) Refrigerator.--The term `refrigerator' means an 
     automatic defrost refrigerator-freezer which has an internal 
     volume of at least 16.5 cubic feet.
       ``(4) MEF.--The term `MEF' means Modified Energy Factor (as 
     determined by the Secretary of Energy).
       ``(e) Special Rules.--
       ``(1) In general.--Rules similar to the rules of 
     subsections (c), (d), and (e) of section 52 shall apply for 
     purposes of this section.

[[Page S2219]]

       ``(2) Aggregation rules.--All persons treated as a single 
     employer under subsection (a) or (b) of section 52 or 
     subsection (m) or (o) of section 414 shall be treated as 1 
     person for purposes of subsection (a).
       ``(f) Verification.--The taxpayer shall submit such 
     information or certification as the Secretary, in 
     consultation with the Secretary of Energy, determines 
     necessary to claim the credit amount under subsection (a).''.
       (b) Limitation on Carryback.--Section 39(d) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to transition rules) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(11) No carryback of energy efficient appliance credit 
     before effective date.--No portion of the unused business 
     credit for any taxable year which is attributable to the 
     energy efficient appliance credit determined under section 
     45G may be carried to a taxable year ending before January 1, 
     2003.''.
       (c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 38(b) of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to general business credit) is 
     amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (14), by 
     striking the period at the end of paragraph (15) and 
     inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(16) the energy efficient appliance credit determined 
     under section 45G(a).''.
       (d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new item:

``Sec. 45G. Energy efficient appliance credit.''.

       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to appliances produced after December 31, 2002, 
     in taxable years ending after such date.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise to voice my strong support for 
legislation introduced today by Senators Lincoln and Allard, entitled 
``The Resource Efficient Appliance Incentive Act of 2003.'' I'm proud 
to be an original cosponsor.
  This legislation will provide a valuable incentive to accelerate and 
expand the production and market penetration of ultra energy-efficient 
appliances. By providing a tax credit for the development of super 
energy-efficient washing machines and refrigerators, this legislation 
creates the incentives necessary to increase the production and sale of 
these appliances in the short term and ultimately lead to a dramatic 
change in consumer purchasing decisions.
  Under this proposal, manufacturers would be eligible to claim a 
credit of either $50 or $100, depending on efficiency level, for each 
super energy-efficient washing machine produced between 2003 and 2007. 
Likewise, manufacturers would be eligible to claim a credit of $50, 
$100, or $150, depending on efficiency level, for each super energy-
efficient refrigerator produced between 2003 and 2007. It is estimated 
that this tax credit will increase the production and purchase of super 
energy-efficient washers by almost 200 percent and the purchase of 
super energy-efficient refrigerators by over 285 percent.
  Equally important is the long-term environmental benefits of the 
expanded use of these appliances. Over the life of the appliances, over 
200 trillion Btus of energy will be saved. This is the equivalent of 
taking 2.3 million cars off the road or closing 6 coal-fired power 
plants for a year. In addition, the clothes washers will reduce the 
amount of water necessary to wash clothes by 870 billion gallons, an 
amount equal to the needs of every household in a city the size of 
Phoenix, Arizona for two years. And, the benefits to consumers over the 
life of the washers and refrigerators from operational savings is 
estimated at nearly $1 billion.
  In my home State of Iowa, this legislation would result in the 
production of 1.5 million super energy-efficient washers and 
refrigerators during the next five years. I also expect Iowans to save 
$11 million in operational costs over the life span of the appliances, 
and 9 billion gallons of water--enough to supply drinking water for the 
entire State for 30 years.
  As Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, I look forward to 
working with Senators Lincoln and Allard as we continue to promote 
energy conservation and efficiency.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MIKULSKI (for herself Ms. Snowe, Mr. Sarbanes, Ms. 
        Collins, Mrs. Murray, and Ms. Cantwell):
  S. 362. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security Act to 
provide that a monthly insurance benefit thereunder shall be paid for 
the month in which the recipient dies, subject to a reduction of 50 
percent if the recipient dies during the first 15 days of such month, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today, I rise to talk about an issue 
that is very important to me, very important to my constituents in 
Maryland and very important to the people of the United States of 
America.
  For the fifth Congress in a row, I am joining in a bipartisan effort 
with my friend and colleague, Senator Olympia Snowe, to end an unfair 
policy of the Social Security System.
  Senator Snowe and I are introducing the Social Security Family 
Protection Act. This bill addresses retirement security and family 
security. We want the middle class of this Nation to know that we are 
going to give help to those who practice self-help.
  What is it I am talking about? I was shocked when I found out that 
Social Security does not pay benefits for the last month of life. If a 
Social Security retiree dies on the 18th of the month or even on the 
30th of the month, the surviving spouse or family members must send 
back the Social Security check for that month.
  I think that is a harsh and heartless rule. That individual worked 
for Social Security benefits, earned those benefits, and paid into the 
Social Security trust fund. The system should allow the surviving 
spouse or the estate of the family to use that Social Security check 
for the last month of life.
  This legislation has an urgency. When a loved one dies, there are 
expenses that the family must take care of. People have called my 
office in tears. Very often it is a son or a daughter that is grieving 
the death of a parent. They are clearing up the paperwork for their mom 
or dad, and there is the Social Security check. And they say, 
``Senator, the check says for the month of May. Mom died on May 28. Why 
do we have to send the Social Security check back? We have bills to 
pay. We have utility coverage that we need to wrap up, mom's rent, or 
her mortgage, or health expenses. Why is Social Security telling me, 
`Send the check back or we're going to come and get you'?''
  With all the problems in our country today, we ought to be going 
after drug dealers and tax dodgers, not honest people who have paid 
into Social Security, and not the surviving spouse or the family who 
have been left with the bills for the last month of their loved one's 
life. They are absolutely right when they call me and say that Social 
Security was supposed to be there for them.
  I've listened to my constituents and to the stories of their lives. 
What they say is this: ``Senator Mikulski, we don't want anything for 
free. But our family does want what our parents worked for. We do want 
what we feel we deserve and what has been paid for in the trust fund in 
our loved one's name. Please make sure that our family gets the Social 
Security check for the last month of our life.''
  That is what our bill is going to do. That is why Senator Snowe and I 
are introducing the Family Social Security Protection Act. When we talk 
about retirement security, the most important part of that is income 
security. And the safety net for most Americans is Social Security.
  We know that as Senators we have to make sure that Social Security 
remains solvent, and we are working to do that. We also don't want to 
create an undue administrative burden at the Social Security 
Administration--a burden that might affect today's retirees. But it is 
absolutely crucial that we provide a Social Security check for the last 
month of life.
  How do we propose to do that? We have a very simple, straightforward 
way of dealing with this problem. Our legislation says that if you die 
before the 15th of the month, you will get a check for half the month. 
If you die after the 15th of the month, your surviving spouse or the 
family estate would get a check for the full month.
  We think this bill is fundamentally fair. Senator Snowe and I are 
old-fashioned in our belief in family values. We believe you honor your 
father and your mother. We believe that it is not only a good religious 
and moral principle, but it is good public policy as well.
  The way to honor your father and mother is to have a strong Social 
Security System and to make sure the system is fair in every way. That 
means fair for the retiree and fair for the

[[Page S2220]]

spouse and family. We strongly feel that the current system is an 
injustice to spouses and families across the Nation. Just because a 
beneficiary passes away, it does not mean that their bills can go 
unpaid. Join us to correct this policy and to ensure that families and 
recipients are protected during this difficult time. That is why we 
support making sure that the surviving spouse or family can keep the 
Social Security check for the last month of life.
  We urge our colleagues to join us in this effort and support the 
Social Security Family Protection Act. I ask unanimous consent that the 
text of my bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 362

       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 ``Social Security Family 
     Protection Act''.

     SEC. 2. COMPUTATION AND PAYMENT OF LAST MONTHLY PAYMENT.

       (a) Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Benefits.--Section 202 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

    ``Last Payment of Monthly Insurance Benefit Terminated by Death

       ``(z)(1) In any case in which an individual dies during the 
     first 15 days of a calendar month, the amount of such 
     individual's monthly insurance benefit under this section 
     paid for such month shall be an amount equal to 50 percent of 
     the amount of such benefit (as determined without regard to 
     this subsection), rounded, if not a multiple of $1, to the 
     next lower multiple of $1. This subsection shall apply with 
     respect to such benefit after all other adjustments with 
     respect to such benefit provided by this title have been 
     made.
       ``(2) Any payment under this section by reason of paragraph 
     (1) shall be made in accordance with section 204(d).''.
       (b) Disability Insurance Benefits.--Section 223 of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 423) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

             ``Last Payment of Benefit Terminated by Death

       ``(k)(1) In any case in which an individual dies during the 
     first 15 days of a calendar month, the amount of such 
     individual's monthly insurance benefit under this section 
     paid for such month shall be an amount equal to 50 percent of 
     the amount of such benefit (as determined without regard to 
     this subsection), rounded, if not a multiple of $1, to the 
     next lower multiple of $1. This subsection shall apply with 
     respect to such benefit after all other adjustments with 
     respect to such benefit provided by this title have been 
     made.
       ``(2) Any payment under this section by reason of paragraph 
     (1) shall be made in accordance with section 204(d).''.
       (c) Benefits at Age 72 for Certain Uninsured Individuals.--
     Section 228 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 428) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

             ``Last Payment of Benefit Terminated by Death

       ``(i)(1) In any case in which an individual dies during the 
     first 15 days of a calendar month, the amount of such 
     individual's monthly insurance benefit under this section 
     paid for such month shall be an amount equal to 50 percent of 
     the amount of such benefit (as determined without regard to 
     this subsection), rounded, if not a multiple of $1, to the 
     next lower multiple of $1. This subsection shall apply with 
     respect to such benefit after all other adjustments with 
     respect to such benefit provided by this title have been 
     made.
       ``(2) Any payment under this section by reason of paragraph 
     (1) shall be made in accordance with section 204(d).''.

     SEC. 3. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS REGARDING PAYMENT OF BENEFITS 
                   FOR MONTH OF RECIPIENT'S DEATH.

       (a) Old-Age Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(a)(3) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(a)(3)) is amended by 
     striking ``the month preceding'' in the matter following 
     subparagraph (B).
       (b) Wife's Insurance Benefits.--
       (1) In general.--Section 202(b)(1)(D) of such Act (42 
     U.S.C. 402(b)(1)(D)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and ending with the month'' in the matter 
     immediately following clause (ii)(II) and inserting ``and 
     ending with the month in which she dies or (if earlier) with 
     the month'';
       (B) by striking subparagraph (E); and
       (C) by redesignating subparagraphs (F) through (K) as 
     subparagraphs (E) through (J), respectively.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 202(b)(5)(B) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(b)(5)(B)) is amended by 
     striking ``(E), (F), (H), or (J)'' and inserting ``(E), (G), 
     or (I)''.
       (c) Husband's Insurance Benefits.--
       (1) In general.--Section 202(c)(1)(D) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(c)(1)(D)) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``and ending with the month'' in the matter 
     immediately following clause (ii)(II) and inserting ``and 
     ending with the month in which he dies or (if earlier) with 
     the month'';
       (B) by striking subparagraph (E); and
       (C) by redesignating subparagraphs (F) through (K) as 
     subparagraphs (E) through (J), respectively.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 202(c)(5)(B) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(c)(5)(B)) is amended by 
     striking ``(E), (F), (H), or (J)'' and inserting ``(E), (G), 
     or (I)''.
       (d) Child's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(d)(1) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(d)(1)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and ending with the month'' in the matter 
     immediately preceding subparagraph (D) and inserting ``and 
     ending with the month in which such child dies or (if 
     earlier) with the month''; and
       (2) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``dies, or''.
       (e) Widow's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(e)(1) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(e)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``ending with the month preceding the first month in 
     which any of the following occurs: she remarries, dies,'' in 
     the matter following subparagraph (F) and inserting ``ending 
     with the month in which she dies or (if earlier) with the 
     month preceding the first month in which any of the following 
     occurs: she remarries, or''.
       (f) Widower's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(f)(1) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(f)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``ending with the month preceding the first month in 
     which any of the following occurs: he remarries, dies,'' in 
     the matter following subparagraph (F) and inserting ``ending 
     with the month in which he dies or (if earlier) with the 
     month preceding the first month in which any of the following 
     occurs: he remarries,''.
       (g) Mother's and Father's Insurance Benefits.--Section 
     202(g)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(g)(1)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``with the month in which he or she dies 
     or (if earlier)'' after ``and ending'' in the matter 
     following subparagraph (F); and
       (2) by striking ``he or she remarries, or he or she dies'' 
     and inserting ``or he or she remarries''.
       (h) Parent's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(h)(1) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(h)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``ending with the month preceding the first month in 
     which any of the following occurs: such parent dies, 
     marries,'' in the matter following subparagraph (E) and 
     inserting ``ending with the month in which such parent dies 
     or (if earlier) with the month preceding the first month in 
     which any of the following occurs: such parent marries,''.
       (i) Disability Insurance Benefits.--Section 223(a)(1) of 
     the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 423(a)(1)) is amended by 
     striking ``ending with the month preceding whichever of the 
     following months is the earliest: the month in which he 
     dies,'' in the matter following subparagraph (D) and 
     inserting the following: ``ending with the month in which he 
     dies or (if earlier) with whichever of the following months 
     is the earliest:''.
       (j) Benefits at Age 72 for Certain Uninsured Individuals.--
     Section 228(a) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 428(a)) 
     is amended by striking ``the month preceding'' in the matter 
     following paragraph (4).
       (k) Exemption From Maximum Benefit Cap.--Section 203 of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 403) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:

                  ``Exemption From Maximum Benefit Cap

       ``(m) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, 
     the application of this section shall be made without regard 
     to any amount received by reason of section 202(z), 223(j), 
     or 228(i).''.

     SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to 
     deaths occurring after the date that is 180 days after the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. MIKULSKI (for herself, Mr. Sarbanes, Ms. Collins, Mr. 
        Bingaman, Mr. Daschle, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Dorgan, Ms. Landrieu, 
        Mrs. Murray, Mr. Breaux, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Kennedy, and Mrs. 
        Clinton):
  S. 363. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security Act to 
provide that the reductions in social security benefits which are 
required in the case of spouses and surviving spouses who are also 
receiving certain Government pensions shall be equal to the amount by 
which two-thirds of the total amount of the combined monthly benefit 
(before reduction) and monthly pension exceeds $1,200, adjusted for 
inflation; to the Committee on Finance.
  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about an issue that 
is very important to me, very important to my constituents in Maryland 
and very important to government workers and retirees across the 
Nation. I am reintroducing a bill to modify a cruel rule of government 
that is unfair and prevents current workers from enjoying the benefits 
of their hard work during retirement. My bill has bipartisan support 
and the House companion bill

[[Page S2221]]

had nearly 300 cosponsors last year. With this strong bipartisan 
support, I hope that we can correct this cruel rule of government this 
year.
  Under current law, a Social Security spousal benefit is reduced or 
entirely eliminated if the surviving spouse is eligible for a pension 
from a local, State or Federal Government job that was not covered by 
Social Security. This policy is known as the Government Pension Offset.
  This is how the current law works. Consider a surviving spouse who 
retires from government service and receives a government pension of 
$600 a month. She also qualifies for a Social Security spousal benefit 
of $645 a month. Because of the Pension Offset law, which reduces her 
Social Security benefit by 2/3 of her government pension, her spousal 
benefit is reduced to $245 a month. So instead of $1245, she will 
receive only $845 a month. That is $400 a month less to pay the rent, 
purchase a prescription medication, or buy groceries. I think that is 
wrong.
  My bill does not repeal the government pension offset entirely, but 
it will allow retirees to keep more of what they deserve. It guarantees 
that those subject to the offset can keep at least $1200 a month in 
combined retirement income. With my modification, the 2/3 offset would 
apply only to the combined benefit that exceeds $1200 a month. So, in 
the example above, the surviving spouse would face only a $30 offset, 
allowing her to keep $1215 in monthly income.
  Unfortunately, the current law disproportionately affects women. 
Women are more likely to receive Social Security spousal benefits and 
to have worked in low-paying or short-term government positions while 
they were raising families. It is also true that women receive smaller 
government pensions because of their lower earnings, and rely on Social 
Security benefits to a greater degree. My modification will allow these 
women who have contributed years of important government service and 
family service to rely on a larger amount of retirement income.
  The last time Congress passed a bill significantly effecting Social 
Security benefits was in 1999. At that time, the Senate unanimously 
voted for and passed H.R. 5, The Senior Citizens' Freedom to Work Act 
of 1999. This legislation ensured that senior citizens who choose to 
work or who must work can earn income after retirement without losing a 
portion of their Social Security benefit. That law helps senior 
citizens who earn above $17,000 per year. In contrast, my bill 
specifically targets those with much lower retirement incomes around 
$13,000 per year and less. I believe that we must work to ensure a 
safety net for all of our seniors--including those retired federal 
employees who every day are forced to make difficult choices between 
rent, food, and prescription drugs due to the drastic effects of the 
government pension offset.
  Why do we punish people who have committed a significant portion of 
their lives to government service? We are talking about workers who 
provide some of the most important services to our community--teachers, 
firefighters, and many others. Some have already retired. Others are 
currently working and looking forward to a deserved retirement. These 
individuals deserve better than the reduced monthly benefits that the 
Pension Offset currently requires.
  Government employees work hard in service to our nation, and I work 
hard for them. I do not want to see them penalized simply because they 
have chosen to work in the public sector, rather than for a private 
employer, and often at lower salaries and sometimes fewer benefits. If 
a retired worker in the private sector received a pension, and also 
received a spousal Social Security benefit, they would not be subject 
to the Offset. I think we should be looking for ways to reward 
government service, not the other way around. I believe that people who 
work hard and play by the rules should not be penalized by arcane, 
legislative technicalities.
  Frankly, I would like to repeal the offset all together. But, I 
realize that budget considerations make that unlikely. As a compromise, 
I hope we can agree that retirees who have worked hard all their lives 
should not have this offset applied until their combined monthly 
benefit, both government pension and Social Security spousal benefit, 
exceeds $1,200.
  I also strongly believe that we should ensure that retirees buying 
power keeps up with the cost of living. That's why I have also included 
a provision in this legislation to index the $1,200 amount to inflation 
so retirees will see their minimum benefits increase along with the 
cost of living.
  The Social Security Administration recently estimated that enacting 
the provisions contained in my bill will have a minimal long-term 
impact on the Social Security Trust Fund--about 0.01 percent of taxable 
payroll. Additionally, my bill is bipartisan and is strongly supported 
by CARE, the Coalition to Assure Retirement Equity with 43 member 
organizations including the National Association of Retired Federal 
Employees, NARFE, the American Federation of Federal State County and 
Municipal Employees, AFSCME, the National Education Association, NEA, 
and the National Treasury Employees Union, NTEU.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort and support my 
legislation to modify the Government Pension Offset. I ask unanimous 
consent that the text of my bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 363

       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 ``Government Pension Offset 
     Reform Act''.

     SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON REDUCTIONS IN BENEFITS FOR SPOUSES AND 
                   SURVIVING SPOUSES RECEIVING GOVERNMENT 
                   PENSIONS.

       (a) Wife's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(b)(4)(A) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(b)(4)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``the amount (if any) by which the sum of 
     such benefit (before reduction under this paragraph) and'' 
     after ``two-thirds of ''; and
       (2) by inserting ``exceeds the amount described in 
     subsection (z) for such month,'' before ``if ''.
       (b) Husband's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(c)(2)(A) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 402(c)(2)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``the amount (if any) by which the sum of 
     such benefit (before reduction under this paragraph) and'' 
     after ``two-thirds of ''; and
       (2) by inserting ``exceeds the amount described in 
     subsection (z) for such month,'' before ``if ''.
       (c) Widow's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(e)(7)(A) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 402(e)(7)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``the amount (if any) by which the sum of 
     such benefit (before reduction under this paragraph) and'' 
     after ``two-thirds of ''; and
       (2) by inserting ``exceeds the amount described in 
     subsection (z) for such month,'' before ``if ''.
       (d) Widower's Insurance Benefits.--Section 202(f)(2)(A) of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 402(f)(2)(A)) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``the amount (if any) by which the sum of 
     such benefit (before reduction under this paragraph) and'' 
     after ``two-thirds of ''; and
       (2) by inserting ``exceeds the amount described in 
     subsection (z) for such month,'' before ``if ''.
       (e) Mother's and Father's Insurance Benefits.--Section 
     202(g)(4)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 402(g)(4)(A)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting ``the amount (if any) by which the sum of 
     such benefit (before reduction under this paragraph) and'' 
     after ``two-thirds of ''; and
       (2) by inserting ``exceeds the amount described in 
     subsection (z) for such month,'' before ``if ''.
       (f) Amount Described.--Section 202 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 
     402) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(z) The amount described in this subsection is, for 
     months in each 12-month period beginning in December of 2003, 
     and each succeeding calendar year, the greater of--
       ``(1) $1200; or
       ``(2) the amount applicable for months in the preceding 12-
     month period, increased by the cost-of-living adjustment for 
     such period determined for an annuity under section 8340 of 
     title 5, United States Code (without regard to any other 
     provision of law).''.
       (g) Limitations on Reductions in Benefits.--Section 202 of 
     such Act (42 U.S.C. 402), as amended by subsection (f), is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(aa) For any month after December 2003, in no event shall 
     an individual receive a reduction in a benefit under 
     subsection (b)(4)(A), (c)(2)(A), (e)(7)(A), (f)(2)(A), or 
     (g)(4)(A) for the month that is more than the reduction in 
     such benefit that would have applied for such month under 
     such subsections as in effect on December 1, 2003.''.

     SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

       The amendments made by section 1 shall apply with respect 
     to monthly insurance benefits payable under title II of the 
     Social Security Act for months after December 2003.

[[Page S2222]]



                          ____________________