[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 110 (Wednesday, July 23, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9795-S9801]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. GRAHAM of South Carolina (for himself, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Cornyn, and Mr. Hatch):
S. 1445. A bill to provide criminal penalties for false personation
of a military officer for purposes of harassing military families and
to clarify the false personation statute with respect to officers and
employees of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to speak to an important
measure that Senators Graham, Schumer, Cornyn, and I have introduced
entitled The Military Family Hoax Prevention Act. As our country
concludes major combat activities in Operation Iraqi Freedom, we all
stand tall with pride over the dedication, courage, and valor displayed
by the men and women of our Armed Forces.
We all are grateful to the men and women of the U.S. military who
selflessly serve our country. They have answered the call of our
Commander in Chief to go abroad and defend the freedoms and values we
cherish here at home. While carrying out their mission, they have acted
admirably during the liberation of an enslaved nation, and continue to
serve our country honorably. These men and women deserve our profound
gratitude.
As we watch the soldiers returning home from deployment, some from
extended tours of duty, I am reminded of the personal sacrifice these
men and women make while they are gone. These men and women leave
behind family and friends who undoubtedly worry constantly about their
loved ones on deployment. In many instances, family members are not
able to know of the day-to-day safety of their loved ones during
deployment. This feeling of helplessness was aptly described by the
brother of Jessica Lynch upon her return to West Virginia when he
discussed her family's desire to learn any bit of information following
her capture.
It has come to my attention that during Operation Iraqi Freedom some
military families received cruel hoaxes concerning their deployed
family members in Iraq. On three separate occasions that I am aware of,
families of service men and women here in the United States received
telephone calls from sick pranksters telling them that their family
members serving in Iraq had either been killed in battle or taken
prisoner of war.
You can imagine the devastation and agony of the families who
received these malicious telephone calls. These families were forced
into a desperate scramble to learn information about the fate of their
loved ones. These hoaxes require the military to dedicate resources to
provide information to military family members.
Let me talk briefly about one specific hoax and the potentially
devastating consequences that can flow from it. A family in Arizona
received a telephone call that a family member had been killed in Iraq.
After contacting the military, the family was told that only the
military notifies families in these instances, and that they do so in
person, not over the telephone. The military told the family that they
had no information that their family member, the soldier, was killed
and that they would try to learn more.
The military discovered that this telephone call was a cruel hoax and
arranged for the soldier to call home from a satellite telephone to
reassure his family. Unfortunately, the soldier later wrote to his
family and told them that another soldier who was transporting a
satellite telephone to him so that he could call home had been killed
while trying to deliver the telephone.
This type of action cannot go unpunished. The current false
impersonation statute does not punish someone who falsely impersonates
a military employee engaging in this type of conduct. This legislation
the Military Family Hoax Prevention Act, would remedy this loophole in
the current law. It would prohibit those who derive some perverted
pleasure terrorizing family members who intensely wait for word from
abroad from their military family members.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. McCain, Mrs. Feinstein, and Mr.
Cornyn):
S. 1447. A bill to establish grant programs to improve the health of
border area residents and for bioterrorism preparedness in the border
area, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill with
Senators McCain, Feinstein, and Cornyn entitled the Border Health
Security Act of 2003. This bill addresses the tremendous health
problems confronting our Nation's southwestern border.
The United States-Mexico border region is defined in the U.S.-Mexico
Border Health Commission authorizing legislation as the area of land
100 kilometers, or 62.5 miles, north and south of the international
boundary. It stretches 2,000 miles from California, through Arizona and
New Mexico to the southern tip of Texas and is estimated to have a
population of 12 million residents.
The border region comprises two sovereign nations, 25 Native American
tribes, and four States in the United States and six States in Mexico.
Why should we provide some focus to this geographic region? The
situation along the border is among the most dire in the country. In
the past, we have recognized problems with other regions, through the
Denali, Delta, and Appalachian commissions, and have provided targeted
funding to those areas. The U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission,
legislation I sponsored with Senators McCain, Simon and Hutchison, was
created for the same reasons and annually receives about $4 million in
funding that is matched by $1 million from the Mexican government for
administrative purposes to improve international cooperation and
agreements to tackle health problems in the region. However, we need to
take the next step and provide resources to address the problems.
In the border region, three of the ten poorest counties in the United
States are located in the border area, 21 of the counties have been
designated as economically distressed, approximately 430,000 people
live in 1,200 colonias in Texas and New Mexico, which are
unincorporated communities that are characterized by substandard
housing, unsafe public drinking water, and wastewater systems, very
high unemployment, and the lower per capita income as a region in the
Nation.
The result is a health system that confronts tremendous health
problems with little or no resources. Although it is difficult to
access the health needs along the border since data is more often
collected on a statewide basis, we do know that diabetes, cancer,
infectious disease such as tuberculosis, and health disease rates are
far greater than the national average but the residents in the area
have the highest uninsured rates in the country.
In fact, the States of Texas, New Mexico, and California rank as the
States with the three worst uninsured rates in the country to begin
with. Arizona is not much better and ranks 46th in the Nation, just
ahead of Louisiana and Oklahoma. The uninsured rates of these States
are: 23.5 percent in Texas, 20.7 percent in New Mexico, 19.5 percent in
California, and 18.3 percent in Arizona.
However, the figures along the border are even worse, as the rates of
uninsured are higher still than that in the four States overall.
Uninsured rates in many border counties are estimated to be above 30
percent and as high as 50 percent in certain communities.
As the U.S.-Mexico Border Commission notes, ``The border is
characterized by weaknesses in the border health
[[Page S9796]]
systems and infrastructure, lack of public financial resources, poor
distribution of physicians and other health professionals and
hospitals. Moreover, the low rates of health insurance coverage and low
incomes puts access to health services out of reach for many border
residents and thus keeps the border communities at risk.''
The U.S.-Mexico Border Commission has identified and approved of an
agenda through its ``Health Border 2010'' initiative, which seeks to,
among other things: reduce by 25 percent the population lacking access
to a primary provider; reduce the female breast cancer death rate by 20
percent; reduce the cervical cancer death rate by 30 percent; reduce
deaths due to diabetes by 10 percent; reduce hospitalizations due to
diabetes by 25 percent; reduce the incidence of HIV cases by 50
percent; reduce the incidence of tuberculosis cases by 50 percent;
reduce the incidence of hepatitis A and B cases by 50 percent; reduce
the infant mortality rate by 15 percent; and increase initiation of
prenatal care in the first trimester by 85 percent.
However, the U.S.-Mexico Border Commission lacks the resources that
are needed to address those important goals. The bipartisan legislation
I am introducing today with Senators McCain, Feinstein, and Cornyn
would address that problem by reauthorizing the U.S.-Mexico Border
Health Commission at $10 million and authorizing another $200 million
in funding to improve the infrastructure, access, and the delivery of
health care services along the entire U.S.-Mexico border.
These grants would be flexible and allow the individual communities
to establish their own priorities with which to spend these funds for
the following range of purposes: maternal and child health, primary
care and preventative health, public health and public health
infrastructure, health promotion, oral health, behavioral and mental
health, substance abuse, health conditions that have a high prevalence
in the border region, medical and health services research, community
health worker or promotoras, health care infrastructure, including
planning and construction grants, health disparities, environmental
health, health education, and outreach and enrollment services with
respect to Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program,
CHIP.
We would certainly expect those grants would be used for the purpose
of striving to achieve the measurable goals established by the ``Health
Border 2010'' initiative.
In addition, the bill contains authorization for $25 million for
funding to border communities to improve the infrastructure,
preparedness, and education of health professionals along the U.S.-
Mexico border with respect to bioterrorism. This includes the
establishment of a health alert network to identify and communicate
information quickly to health providers about emerging health care
threats.
On October 15, 2001, just one month after the September 11, 2001,
attack on our Nation, Secretary Thompson spoke to the U.S.-Mexico
Border Health Commission and urged them to put together an application
for $25 million for bioterrorism and preparedness. The Commission has
done so but has not seen targeted funding despite the vulnerability
that border communities have with respect to a bioterrorism attack. Our
legislation addresses the vulnerability of communities along the border
and targets funding to those communities specifically to improve
infrastructure, training, and preparedness.
I ask unanimous consent to include articles from the El Paso Times
and the Los Angeles Times from October 2001 with respect to those
meetings and hope the Secretary will be an advocate with us in the
passage of this legislation.
There being no objection, the articles were ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the El Paso Times, Oct. 16, 2001]
Health Secretary To Fight for Border Funds
(By Tammy Fonce-Olivas)
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson
wants to arm the border with $25 million to combat illnesses.
``Diseases don't stop at the border,'' said Thompson, who
was in El Paso on Monday. ``We need to work in a
collaborative fashion to improve the health of the border
neighborhood. It's our neighborhood.''
He talked about the additional funds he is seeking for
border health initiatives while chairing the fourth
binational meeting of the U.S.-Mexico Border Health
Commission.
Thompson was joined by Julio Frenk Mora, Mexico's Secretary
of Health.
Thompson said he didn't know if he would get the $25
million from Congress but vowed to make a strong effort to
get more funding for programs to improve access to public
health for those living along the border and bolstering
border health research.
Frenk Mora also said he will be fighting for more money to
support border health programs. Frenk is a co-chairman of the
commission.
The group is composed of 26 public-health leaders from both
sides of the U.S.-Mexico border, who are devoted to fighting
health problems, such as tuberculosis, AIDS and diabetes.
Dr. Laurence Nickey, El Paso's former city-county health
director and member of the commission, said he wants to see
more funding concentrated on diabetes.
He said diabetes is diagnosed in one of five Hispanics on
the border by the age of 45. He expects this statistic to
become worse unless more work is done in this area.
Frenk Mora said Mexico understands the importance of public
health and will do its share to improve the health and
wellness of people residing along the border.
Mayor Ray Caballero, who attended the meeting, said one of
El Paso's biggest problem is a lack of health-care providers.
``We are not able to attract or retain enough physicians,''
he said.
Thompson announced after the meeting that the University of
Texas Health Sciences Center in San Antonio has been awarded
a $250,000 grant to establish a Regional Center for Health
Workforce Studies.
workshop
Today will be the final session of the U.S.-Mexico
Binational Tuberculosis Workshop at the Hilton Camino Real.
Among today's discussions will be a binational information
system, as well as talks on consensus building.
____
[From the Los Angeles Times, Oct. 17, 2001]
U.S., Mexico Team Up on Health Care
(By James F. Smith)
The United States and Mexico took some imaginative steps
this week to combat health problems that plague border
communities and migrant workers, including tuberculosis,
diabetes and AIDS.
Meeting in El Paso and neighboring Ciudad Juarez, Mexico,
health experts from the two nations agreed on a 10-year
agenda for improving care for the 11.5 million people living
along the nearly 2,000-mile border.
Mexico also launched a program that promises a new approach
to treating migrants' health problems. Formally unveiled in
Ciudad Juarez on Sunday, the ``Go Healthy, Return Healthy''
initiative seeks to help Mexico migrants in their hometowns,
along the routes they travel and during their stays in the
United States.
Elsewhere, California and Mexico kicked off the program by
staging their first joint ``health week.'' California is
conducting a flurry of activities through Friday for migrants
in the state, including vaccinations, checkups and
information campaigns. The California Endowment is devoting
part of a $50-million agricultural health grant to the
initiative.
The mere fact that U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary
Tommy G. Thompson showed up for the U.S.-Mexico Border health
Commission meeting here Monday--despite an international
anthrax scare--delighted the Mexicans, who have worried that
U.S. relations with their nation would become a low priority
for the Bush administration following the Sept. 11 terrorist
attacks.
Officials from both nations emphasized that the border
health problems are real and immediate threats, killing many
thousands of people each year.
``We should not let the anthrax scare kidnap our entire
health agenda,'' said Mexican Health Secretary Julio Frenk.
``There are a lot of other very important issues of much
higher risk to our populations.''
Thompson, meanwhile, offered a challenge to the U.S.
delegation to the year-old Border Health Commission: He'll
try to come up with an additional $25 million for health
projects along the frontier if they can come up with
specific, effective ways to spend the money.
A commission study issued Monday detailed the serious
health challenges on the border, compounded by population
growth of 28% on the U.S. side and 39% on the Mexican side
during the 1990s, about twice the national growth rate in
each country.
The study found that rates of communicable diseases such as
tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and hepatitis A are higher in the
border region than nationally for both countries. Cancer,
asthma and diabetes rates also are higher along the border.
``The high level of border crossings between the U.S. and
Mexico complicates the development of strategies to address
the spread of infectious diseases,'' the report says,
heightening the need for coordinated policies.
While the commission debated overall strategies, a workshop
of about 100 experts on tuberculosis met to map out
innovative cross-border approaches to tracking and caring for
patients. The interruption of tuberculosis treatment is
highly dangerous for patients because it can lead to
resistance to
[[Page S9797]]
medication. Yet such breaks in treatment occur frequently
when ailing migrants cross illegally into the United States.
The workshop focused on development of a binational
tuberculosis card that would allow patients to continue
treatment on either side of the border with confidentiality.
The cared would not only ensure continuity in treatment but
allow both countries to improve their database of
tuberculosis cases.
Dr. Lincoln Chen, a public health expert from the
Rockefeller Foundation, said such initiatives make the border
region ``the cutting edge of health in the 21st century . . .
This is the front line of global health.''
Thompson and Frenk visited sites that symbolize the
emerging cooperation, from the La Fe health clinic in south
El Paso, which treats many Latino AIDS patients, to a U.S.
Food and Drug Administration inspection operation. In
September, the two governments agreed to expand efforts to
ensure the safety of meat, poultry and egg products that are
shipped across the border in immense volumes.
In California, meanwhile, seven counties that are home to
large numbers of migrant workers took part in the health week
with Mexico. Jose Ignacio Santos, head of child health in
Mexico and director of the ``Go Health, Return Healthy''
program, said the initiative brings to the U.S. some of the
techniques that have made Mexico's public health system
highly regarded. Those included very public community
outreach activities, which have helped achieve a 98%
immunization rate.
In Mexico, the thrice-yearly National Public Health Weeks--
such as one that began Sunday--bring vaccinations to the
homes of millions of people. More than 11 million injections
will be given in Mexico this week for childhood diseases, in
programs supported by nearly 180,000 volunteers.
Similar efforts are being carried out this week in the
seven California counties, with a focus on messages about
cervical and breast cancer, immunizations and diabetes. The
goal is to reach some of the more than 3 million Mexicans
living and working in the state, especially the 1 million
agricultural laborers.
Frenk, the health secretary, said that in the past, Mexico
did not clearly understand the differences between treating
stable and migrant populations. The new program acknowledges
that migrants carry health problems with them as they leave
home--and bring back ailments such as AIDS when they return
from the United States.
Now officials are developing preventive programs in 502
towns in the 10 Mexican states that produce the most
migrants, including Jalisco and Guanajuato.
The effort will also respond to the seasonal moves of the
workers. For example, it calls for information and
immunization campaigns in August and September, when migrants
often leave home to work during the harvest season. It
prepares for treating the workers when they return home at
year's end or Easter.
Frenk said the new model demands a high level of
coordination with U.S. authorities. And it will require new
levels of trust from illegal migrants that the health
information won't be used against them, he said.
``The ideal would be a well-coordinated system in which we
could say to the U.S. authorities: `There goes a migrant who
has tuberculosis. Care for him,''' he said. ``Some day not
too far in the future, there will be electronic clinical
histories on a card with an intelligent chip, and the person
will carry it. But this will require much trust on the part
of illegal migrants.''
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, our relationship with Mexico, like that
with Canada, is a special one. Those countries are our closest
neighbors, and yet, we often and wrongly neglect our neighbor to the
South and the much needed economic development needed in the region.
Mexico is the United States' second largest trading partner and the
border is recognized as one of the busiest ports of entry in the world.
And yet, the region is often neglected.
As the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission points out, ``Without
increases and sustained federal, state and local governmental and
private funding for health programs, infrastructure and education, the
border populations will continue to lag behind the United States in
these areas.'' If the border were its own state, according to data from
the Heath Resources and Services Administration, it would: rank last in
access to health care; second in death rates due to hepatitis; third in
deaths related to diabetes; last in per capita income; first in the
number of school children living in poverty; and, first in the numbers
of the uninsured.
I would like to thank Senator McCain, who was the original cosponsor
of the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission legislation, Public Law
103-400, that we passed in 1994 and is the lead cosponsor of this
legislation as well, for his outstanding leadership on border issues
throughout his career. I would also thank Senators Feinstein and Cornyn
for working with us on this important legislation and Senator Hutchison
for her constant support for the appropriations of the U.S.-Mexico
Border Commission upon the signed agreement between the United States
and Mexico, which was signed by President Clinton on July 14, 2000.
I urge the adoption of this bipartisan legislation by this Congress.
I ask unanimous consent that a fact sheet and 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:
Fact Sheet--Border Health Security Act of 2003
Senators Jeff Bingaman, D-NM, John McCain, R-AZ, Dianne
Feinstein, D-CA, and John Cornyn, R-TX, are preparing to
introduce the ``Border Health Security Act of 2003.'' The
legislation seeks to improve the infrastructure, access, and
delivery of health care services to residents along the U.S.-
Mexico border.
The legislation would achieve these goals by:
Improving Border Health Services: Provides for $200 million
in funding to States, local governments, tribal governments,
institutions of higher education, nonprofit health
organizations, or community health centers along the U.S.-
Mexico border to improve infrastructure, access, and the
delivery of health care services.
These grants are flexible and would allow the community to
establish its own priorities with which to spend these funds
for the following range of purposes: maternal and child
health, primary care and preventative health, public health
and public health infrastructure, health promotion, oral
health, behavioral and mental health, substance abuse, health
conditions that have a high prevalence in the border region,
medical and health services research, community health
workers or promotoras, health care infrastructure, including
planning and construction grants, health disparities,
environmental health, health education, and outreach and
enrollment services with respect to Medicaid and the State
Children's Health Insurance Program, CHIP.
Providing Border Bioterrorism Preparedness Grants: Provides
for $25 million in funding to States and local governments or
public health departments to improve the infrastructure,
preparedness, and education of health professionals along the
U.S.-Mexico border with respect to bioterrorism. This
includes the establishment of a health alert network to
identify and communicate information quickly to health
providers about emerging health care threats.
Reauthorizing the U.S.-Mexico Border Health Commission:
Provides for the reauthorization of the U.S.-Mexico Border
Health Commission at $10 million annually.
S. 1447
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 ``Border Health Security Act
of 2003''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Border area.--The term ``border area'' has the meaning
given the term ``United States-Mexico Border Area'' in
section 8 of the United States-Mexico Border Health
Commission Act (22 U.S.C. 290n-6).
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Health and Human Services.
SEC. 3. BORDER HEALTH GRANTS.
(a) Eligible Entity Defined.--In this section, the term
``eligible entity'' means a State, public institution of
higher education, local government, tribal government,
nonprofit health organization, or community health center
receiving assistance under section 330 of the Public Health
Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254b), that is located in the border
area.
(b) Authorization.--From funds appropriated under
subsection (f), the Secretary, acting through the United
States members of the United States-Mexico Border Health
Commission, shall award grants to eligible entities to
address priorities and recommendations to improve the health
of border area residents that are established by--
(1) the United States members of the United States-Mexico
Border Health Commission;
(2) the State border health offices; and
(3) the Secretary.
(c) Application.--An eligible entity that desires a grant
under subsection (b) shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require.
(d) Use of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a grant
under subsection (b) shall use the grant funds for--
(1) programs relating to--
(A) maternal and child health;
(B) primary care and preventative health;
(C) public health and public health infrastructure;
(D) health promotion;
(E) oral health;
(F) behavioral and mental health;
(G) substance abuse;
(H) health conditions that have a high prevalence in the
border area;
(I) medical and health services research;
[[Page S9798]]
(J) workforce training and development;
(K) community health workers or promotoras;
(L) health care infrastructure problems in the border area
(including planning and construction grants);
(M) health disparities in the border area;
(N) environmental health;
(O) health education; and
(P) outreach and enrollment services with respect to
Federal programs (including programs authorized under titles
XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 and
1397aa)); and
(2) other programs determined appropriate by the Secretary.
(e) Supplement, Not Supplant.--Amounts provided to an
eligible entity awarded a grant under subsection (b) shall be
used to supplement and not supplant other funds available to
the eligible entity to carry out the activities described in
subsection (d).
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section, $200,000,000
for fiscal year 2004, and such sums as may be necessary for
each succeeding fiscal year.
SEC. 4. BORDER BIOTERRORISM PREPAREDNESS GRANTS.
(a) Eligible Entity Defined.--In this section, the term
``eligible entity'' means a State, local government, tribal
government, or public health entity.
(b) Authorization.--From funds appropriated under
subsection (e), the Secretary shall award grants to eligible
entities for bioterrorism preparedness in the border area.
(c) Application.--An eligible entity that desires a grant
under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require.
(d) Uses of Funds.--An eligible entity that receives a
grant under subsection (b) shall use the grant funds to--
(1) develop and implement bioterror preparedness plans and
readiness assessments and purchase items necessary for such
plans;
(2) coordinate bioterrorism and emergency preparedness
planning in the region;
(3) improve infrastructure, including syndrome surveillance
and laboratory capacity;
(4) create a health alert network, including risk
communication and information dissemination;
(5) educate and train clinicians, epidemiologists,
laboratories, and emergency personnel; and
(6) carry out such other activities identified by the
Secretary, the United States-Mexico Border Health Commission,
State and local public health offices, and border health
offices.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $25,000,000 for
fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be necessary for each
succeeding fiscal year.
SEC. 5. UNITED STATES-MEXICO BORDER HEALTH COMMISSION ACT
AMENDMENTS.
The United States-Mexico Border Health Commission Act (22
U.S.C. 290n et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
Act $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be
necessary for each succeeding fiscal year.''.
SEC. 6. COORDINATION OF HEALTH SERVICES AND SURVEILLANCE.
The Secretary may coordinate with the Secretary of Homeland
Security in establishing a health alert system that--
(1) alerts clinicians and public health officials of
emerging disease clusters and syndromes along the border
area; and
(2) is alerted to signs of health threats or bioterrorism
along the border area.
Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, recognizing that the communities along our
Nation's border are literally our front line of defense, it is in the
interest of our national security to ensure that these areas are well
equipped to respond to health emergencies and potential bioterror
attacks. To address the critical needs of this vulnerable region, I am
pleased to once again join my good friends from New Mexico, Senator
Bingaman, along with Senator Feinstein and Senator Cornyn, in
introducing the Border Health Security Act of 2003.
Ten years ago, Senator Bingaman and I introduced a bill which we
believed represented a first step toward addressing the many health
challenges confronting the U.S.-Mexico border region as it faced
growing population and an expanding industrial base. The United States-
Mexico Border Health Commission Act authorized the President to enter
into a bilateral agreement with Mexico and establish a binational
commission on border health, and was signed into law in the fall of
1994.
Six years later the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and
the Secretary of Health of Mexico signed an agreement creating the
United States-Mexico Border Health Commission. Although still in its
infancy, the Commission serves to draw attention to the unique needs of
the border region, while improving and protecting the health and well-
being of the residents on both sides of the border.
The bill we are introducing today builds upon the effort we began 10
years ago. This legislation authorizes two new grant programs targeting
health care and bioterror preparedness in the border area in addition
to funding for the Commission.
The first grant program we establish, the Border Health Grants, will
be competitively awarded to programs that improve health care
infrastructure or address the unique health care needs of the border
region. Eligible programs could address health disparities, public
health, maternal and child health, and conditions with a high
prevalence in the border area. Acknowledging our national vulnerability
in the wake of September 11 attacks and the need to ensure that
bioterror efforts are specifically focused on the border region, our
bill establishes bioterror preparedness grants for activities including
coordination of bioterror and emergency preparedness, improvements in
infrastructure, and education and training.
The communities along our Nation's southern border typically have
high rates of uninsured and underinsured individuals, unemployment, and
poverty. This region also has higher rates of infections and chronic
diseases, often exacerbated by migrant populations. Compounding these
problems is the lack of health care facilities and qualified health
care professionals. According to the U.S.-Mexico Border Health
Commission, if the border area were a state, it would rank last in
access in health care, second in death rates due to hepatitis, third in
deaths related to diabetes, first in number of TB cases and last in per
capita income.
I have long supported legislative initiatives aimed at improving the
security and quality of life in our border area. This bill is a part of
that ongoing effort. As our Nation enters a new era of heightened
national alert, it is incumbent upon us to ensure our border area--our
front line of defense--is strenghtened and protected.
______
By Ms. MURKOWSKI:
S. 1448. A bill to provide for the construction of the Yupik Alaskan/
Central Kuskokwim Energy Project, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President today I introduce a very important piece
of legislation, the Calista Energy and Economic Revitalization Act.
This legislation will create a profound and positive effect on one of
the most impoverished parts of my State, the Upper Kuskokwim region by
providing major boost to the economy of this area. It will also provide
affordable energy to this region, which pays some of the highest energy
costs in the country.
My legislation will authorize a grant and loan guarantee program to
permit the construction of a vitally important intertie from the Upper
Kuskokwim region to Bethel, Alaska. This project will provide low cost
energy to revitalize this region much as the Tennessee Valley and
Bonneville Power projects revitalized the South and Northwest,
respectively.
Alaska was just a territory when these visionary projects were
conceived and constructed. It is now time for the State of Alaska to
join in the national commitment and partnership for economic vitality.
The Upper Kuskokwim region has been inhabited by the Yupik Eskimo for
thousands of years and they have developed a unique lifestyle which
allows them to thrive in a harsh and formidable climate.
On December 18, 1971, Congress enacted the Alaska Native Claims
Settlement Act, ANCSA, in recognition and settlement of the aboriginal
claims of the Yupik Eskimo people in the Upper Kuskokwim regions.
Pursuant to ANCSA the Calista Corporation was formed by the Yupik
Eskimo people to represent their needs and interests in implementation
of ANCSA.
The Calista Corporation has selected as port of its land entitlement
under ANCSA the Donlin Creek area of the Upper Kuskokwim region. As
owner of the Donlin Creek area, Calista has made a discovery of
international significance of gold and other minerals which will aid
the country and the Yupik Eskimo people if that area is developed. I
can assure you, that there is
[[Page S9799]]
wide spread support among the local Yupik population that their lands
be developed.
The Donlin Creek area is currently isolated and unconnected by road
or utility services to the rest of the State of Alaska and the Nation.
It is fair and equitable that the Congress enacts legislation to aid
and assist the Yupik Eskimo people, through the Calista Corporation, in
developing this energy project referenced in my bill. The goal of this
project is to provide reasonable and adequate utility service to the
local people and to serve to the development of the minerals in the
Donlin Creek area.
The Upper Kuskokwim region contains numerous Yupik Eskimo villages
which are also isolated from the rest of the State and the Nation.
According to government reports, the unemployment rate in the region is
about 25 percent but the actual joblessness rate is much higher. The
government reports stop counting people as unemployed after that have
not had a job after several years. There is currently little or no
opportunity for year round nongovernmental employment in this region.
For example, one of the few opportunities to participate in the cash
economy available in the region comes from fishing, but fishing income
has plunged by about 50 percent from nearly $12,000 to about $5,000
annually. Because of this drastic decline in fishing income and a
general lack of available private sector jobs, Federal and State
transfer payments make up 33 percent of income in the Bethel U.S.
Census District area and nearly 45 percent of the Wade Hampton U.S.
Census District in the Upper Kuskokwim region near the Donlin Creek
site.
Passage of this legislation will provide a sound economic opportunity
for the Yupik Eskimo and other residents of the region and give them an
opportunity to enjoy a better quality of life. Calista is committed to
turning this project into the private sector engine for this part of
Alaska. If successful, Federal transfer payments will be reduced and
local residents will have the ability to support themselves and their
families with solid, well paying private sector jobs.
Utility costs are now more than 10 times the national average. By
providing a year round employment base and more equitable and
affordable access to utility services, this project will improve the
lives of all residents of the region.
I am excited about this bill and will work hard to achieve its
passage. It is my hope to have a hearing on this bill very soon and
seek its passage in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the
full Senate before the end of the year. I urge my colleagues to support
this legislation.
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. 1448
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 ``Calista Energy and Economic
Revitalization Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) the Yupik Eskimo people have--
(A) inhabited the Upper Kuskokwim region for thousands of
years; and
(B) developed a unique lifestyle that allows the people to
thrive in a harsh and formidable climate;
(2) on December 18, 1971, Congress enacted the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) in
recognition and settlement of the aboriginal claims of the
Yupik Eskimo people in the Upper Kuskokwim regions;
(3) under that Act--
(A) the Calista Regional Corporation was formed by the
Yupik Eskimo people to represent the needs and interests of
the Yupik Eskimo people in implementing the Act; and
(B) the Corporation has selected as part of the land
entitlement the Donlin Creek area of the Upper Kuskokwim
region;
(4) as owner of the Donlin Creek area, Calista Regional
Corporation has made a discovery of international
significance of gold and other minerals that would aid the
Yupik Eskimo people if developed;
(5) there is widespread support among the local Yupik
population for development of the Donlin Creek area;
(6) the Donlin Creek area is currently isolated and
unconnected by road or utility services to the rest of the
State of Alaska;
(7) the Upper Kuskokwim region contains many Yupik Eskimo
villages that are not connected to the rest of the State of
Alaska;
(8) the unemployment rate in the region is almost 25
percent, and there is currently little or no opportunity for
year-round nongovernmental employment;
(9) it is fair and equitable that Congress enact
legislation to aid and assist the Yupik Eskimo people,
through the Calista Regional Corporation, in providing
reasonable and adequate utility services to the area; and
(10) Congress should act to provide a sound economic
opportunity for the Yupik Eskimo and other residents of the
region to enjoy an improved quality of life by providing a
year round employment base.
SEC. 3. CALISTA ENERGY PROJECT AUTHORIZATION.
(a) Financial Assistance.--The Secretary of Energy shall,
subject to any terms and conditions that the Secretary
determines to be appropriate, provide the Calista Regional
Corporation grants and loan guarantees to assist in the
construction of the Calista Energy Project as generally
identified in the document entitled ``Calista Region Energy
Needs Study'' and dated July 1, 2002.
(b) Federal Share.--The Federal share of the cost of
construction of the Calista Energy Project shall be not more
than 80 percent.
(c) Limitation.--The total amount of financial assistance
that the Secretary may provide under subsection (a) is--
(1) $100,000,000 for grants; and
(2) $50,000,000 for loan guarantees.
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are
necessary to carry out this Act.
______
By Mr. CRAPO (for himself and Mrs. Lincoln):
S. 1449. A bill to improve the capacity of the Secretary of
Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to prepare and conduct
hazardous fuels reduction projects on National Forest System land and
Bureau of Land Management land that are aimed at protecting
communities, watersheds, and certain other at-risk land from
catastrophic wildfire, to enhance efforts to protect watersheds and
address threats to forest and rangeland health on public and private
land, including catastrophic wildfire, to increase research on forest
health and forest-damaging agents, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, Idaho faces grim news this morning as the
deaths of two young wildland firefighters are reported. They were
killed late Tuesday afternoon while fighting the Cramer fire in the
Salmon-Challis National Forest west of the town of Salmon near the
confluence of the middle fork of the Salmon River and the main Salmon.
These men are heroes of battle, just as the men and women fighting
overseas. They fought a faceless, terrifying enemy with bravery,
heroism, and selfless dedication to the families and communities of
central Idaho. Their sacrifice will be remembered for years to come as
their names are added to the list of those fallen in service to their
country in the capacity of wildland firefighters. I pray that those who
continue to fight fires in Idaho and across the West this summer remain
out of harm's way as they perform their valiant and critical work to
preserve homes, property, and life.
The tragedy is that two more people have died. We hope it is not
followed by more as we enter another fire season. The truth is that our
forests are overgrown, dead and dying, and this kind of tragedy was
inevitable. Legislation that I supported in the past would have made a
difference. Had it been enacted last year or the year before, these
senseless deaths could very well have been avoided. Idaho's wildfire
season is just getting into its full swing, and we are asking our
wildland firefighters in Idaho and throughout the rest of the Nation to
do a dangerous job. We in Congress owe it to them and to the family
members of those who didn't make it to provide them with the tools
necessary to get the job done as safely and quickly as possible. These
deaths are a tragic reminder of the sacrifices and risks wildland
firefighters make to ensure the safety of our communities. Congress
must act to reduce this threat to our communities and improve the
safety of our firefighters. Today, Senator Lincoln and I are
introducing bipartisan legislation to address the forest health crisis
facing our nation.
As Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Agriculture Committee's
Subcommittee on Forestry, Conservation, and Rural Revitalization,
Senator Lincoln and I have learned of the similarities between the
problems facing
[[Page S9800]]
the ecosystems of eastern and western forests. We know that when
Congress acts to address the health of forests in the West--forests
that have been devastated by fires that garner national attention--we
must also reduce the risks to our forests across the country. The
threat is not just to our property and lives, but clean air, clean
water, and wildlife habitat. We must take a comprehensive approach to
protecting our resources, and Senator Lincoln and I attempt to do that
in this bill.
The America's Healthy Forests Restoration and Research Act builds on
the bipartisan legislation that passed the House of Representatives and
is now under consideration in the Senate.
Like the House proposal, our bill addresses the ``analysis
paralysis'' that prevents us from taking actions to protect our lands.
For lands that are at risk of catastrophic fire or that have been
severely damaged by insect or disease infestations or the aftermath of
severe weather events, such as windthrow or ice storms, the bill
creates an expedited process to allow for treatment. For these specific
projects on Forest Service or Bureau of Land Management lands--with the
exception of lands that are wilderness areas or Wilderness Study
Areas--the bill provides for time limits on appeals, reforms the
appeals process, and provides guidance to the courts.
The per-acre costs of fuel reduction projects is higher and the
amount of time to consider a project is longer with each alternative
the agencies are required to consider. Each of these alternatives
requires a complete and thorough environmental analysis. By selecting
projects through the collaborative process and requiring an in-depth
analysis of the environmental impacts of the specific project, we can
ensure that the impacts of the project are addressed, without the
analysis paralysis caused by the examination of additional
alternatives--especially when projects are most often appealed based on
failure to complete adequate analysis on alternatives rather than the
substance of the project.
The time for action is now, we should not let fuels reduction
projects be delayed or lose their effectiveness through frivolous
appeals. By requiring the Forest Service to develop a new process that
allows for public collaboration, by requiring substantive comments to
the project, and by requiring participation in the process before
allowing litigation, the bill ensures that public comment is meaningful
and constructive. No longer will these important projects be stopped
simply by 33 cents on a postcard.
Our bill also requires that the courts balance the long term effects
with the short term effects of a project. This balance of harm should
be common sense, but that has not been the case. The courts are
reminded they should balance the impact of inaction in their decision
making.
This streamlining of the appeals and judicial review process will
counter the growing use of appeals and litigation as delaying and
frustrating techniques rather than the constructive recourse they were
intended for. Cutting through the bureaucratic red tape and ensuring
for robust public participation--as outlined in the widely-supported
Western Governors Association's collaborative strategy--is a win-win
for our forests and our communities. In addition, by streamlining the
process, we get more money on the ground and in action to protect our
forests. Appeals, litigation, and extensive analysis of unneeded
alternatives mean less money for projects. Some estimate that only
sixty percent of funds allocated for fuels reduction actually makes it
to the ground. Streamlining the process should result in significantly
more resources to address forest health.
I have long been an advocate of better utilization of biomass and
small diameter materials. This bill addresses the need for more
research and more markets. Our bi-partisan bill provides grants to
those who would use biomass for fuel or other beneficial purposes.
Instead of leaving fuels in our forests to burn or tossing them in
landfills, we can reduce the risks to our environment and create an
incentive to use what has traditionally not been cost effective to use.
Unlike the house bill, we expand eligible uses beyond just useful
fuels. In Idaho, we have companies that can use this material for
environmental restoration. We need to do more to create incentives to
use this material.
To that end, our bill also includes expanded research into
utilization and harvesting of small diameter materials. Light on the
land techniques that find more and better uses of biomass and small
diameter materials can revitalize our rural communities. Research into
the costs and obstacles to using these materials will go a long way
toward expanded markets and rural development. The bill also provides
direction for technology transfer to get this information from the
universities and scientists to the communities and small businesses in
rural parts of America.
Our bipartisan bill makes research a central tenet. From research
into biomass, forests conditions, upland hardwoods, the measure brings
a new focus to forest threats. Our legislation expands the research to
allow for landscape level research on forest-damaging agents. Fire,
insects and disease, and weather events pose a significant threat to
our forest ecosystems. The bill provides for cooperation with colleges
and universities in applied research to combat these threats.
The bill also focuses research on preserving upland hardwoods. Not
enough is known about preserving and restoring the upland hardwood
forests of the South. The creation of an upland hardwood forest
research center will go a long way toward finding ways to better
protect, rehabilitate, restore, and utilize these important resources.
The proposal includes a watershed program that will help foresters
enhance water quality in our forests. As many know, our forests serve
as critical watersheds that provide drinking water to our communities.
This bill provides for grants to allow for technical assistance,
education, and financial assistance to enhance our efforts to ensure
clean waters for our communities and wildlife.
A program to maintain forested habitat for threatened and endangered
species is also an important part of this legislation. By providing for
short and long-term restoration agreements the program offers
incentives to maintain and utilize efforts that protect species and
prevent others from being listed.
The legislation provides assistance to address the problem of
nonnative invasive plants, trees, shrubs, and vines. Across the
country, the expansion of nonnative invasive plants has changed
ecosystems making them more susceptible to threats that could result in
catastrophic fires. Our proposal provides assistance to landowners in
addressing these invasives.
Finally, the bill declares that the enhanced community fire
protection program is an important program in reducing risks to
communities. This program, which we enacted as part of the 2002 Farm
Bill, provides assistance to communities in reducing fire threats.
Providing funding for this program, coupled with the savings from
streamlining the process, will provide for meaningful progress in
reducing the wildfire threat.
I agree with Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth, who says we need to
move the focus from what we take to what we leave. As he has
identified, too many are looking at this as a zero-sum game. They seek
someone to blame for forest health problems or argue that logging is
inherently bad. We need to get beyond that fallacious argument and
realize that what is important is restoring a healthy ecosystem: an
ecosystem that allows for a natural fire regime to exist without
threatening our communities and lives.
I hope my colleagues will join me moving beyond the narrow focus that
currently passes for forest policy, this zero-sum game, and look at the
needs of our forest ecosystems. This bill is a bipartisan effort that
enhances the House-passed legislation. It sets a mark that the majority
of the Senate can and should support.
The skies over Idaho's capitol city, Boise, are smoke-filled this
afternoon, and another tiny town on the edge of Idaho's Frank Church
River of No Return Wilderness, Atlanta, is threatened as fire
encroaches on the homes there. Firefighting resources are stretched to
the limit as wildland fires are burning throughout Idaho and the West.
Wildfires this year have charred some 1.46 million acres nationwide.
The National Interagency Fire Center said there were 49 large fires
burning in the West, with more than 350 thousand
[[Page S9801]]
areas of active wildfires. Let us in Congress take a stand now to help
protect our forests and keep them from going up in smoke every year.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to garner their support
for this much-needed, bipartisan legislation, and know that they join
me in sending condolences to the families of the two young men who died
fighting a fire that may very well have been preventable.
Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my good friend
Senator Crapo of Idaho in introducing legislation aimed at
rehabilitating this Nation's public and private forestlands. Senator
Crapo and I serve as the Chair and Ranking Member of the Agriculture
Subcommittee on Forestry, and we have worked together extensively in
watching over our Nation's forestlands.
Our bipartisan legislation builds upon the Healthy Forest Restoration
Act, which passed the House of Representatives earlier this year. Our
bill will ensure that we can address the many problems affecting all of
our Nation's forests--both on public and private forestlands, in
southern and western forests, and throughout both hardwood and pine
ecosystems. Our legislation is intended to be a marker for the
direction we believe forest legislation should move in this country.
Both Senator Crapo and I have been working closely with the Senate
Agriculture Committee to ensure that the goals of our legislation are
incorporated into the chairman's mark of the Senate's Healthy Forest
legislation.
Our legislation is intended to accomplish a few, very specific goals.
First and foremost, we must provide the Forest Service with the tools
necessary to immediately address the epidemic of oak decline and
mortality in the Ozark highlands of Arkansas and Missouri.
Oak decline is a natural occurrence in older forests or in areas
where trees are stressed by conditions such as old age, over population
of the forest, poor soil conditions, and the effects of several years
of severe drought. And under normal conditions, oak decline is not
necessarily fatal to the tree.
However, these conditions have allowed insects such as the red oak
borer to flourish throughout the forest and has led to an epidemic of
oak mortality throughout our forests.
In fact, many estimates now suggest that potentially up to one
million acres of red oaks have been affected in Ozark highlands. And it
is important to note that this epidemic has not been long in coming--it
was only first discovered in the late 1990s. I am concerned that this
epidemic will lead to a complete loss of red oak from the Ozark
highlands and cause long-term changes to the health of the forest
ecosystem.
It is also important to remember that the epidemic has not been
limited to public lands. Private forest landowners and homeowners
throughout the Ozarks face the same problem. The past several years of
extremely dry summer conditions have weakened trees throughout the
region.
The legislation also contains provisions that are intended to
streamline and improve the environmental, administrative, and judicial
review process for hazardous fuel reduction projects under this
legislation. I join Senator Crapo in believing that the review process
for hazardous fuel reduction projects, while necessary and beneficial,
often consumes more time, effort, and resources than the initial intent
of the project.
I am also aware that there are ongoing discussions regarding these
environmental, administrative, and judicial review issues. I look
forward to working with my colleagues on the Agriculture Committee and
in the entire Senate to modify and improve the environmental,
administrative, and judicial review provisions of this legislation in
order to address my colleagues' concerns.
As we have seen with the epidemic of oak mortality in Arkansas, the
Forest Service must have the ability to quickly respond to insect
infestation in order to protect, preserve, and rehabilitate the entire
forest. Streamlining of the environmental, administrative, and judicial
review process for hazardous fuel reduction projects will ensure that
we can quickly address what ails our forests.
Secondly, our legislation also provides increased funding and
direction for forestland research in this country. Our legislation will
ensure that our Nation's colleges and universities are able to devote
more research into the insects and diseases affecting our forests. We
also require that any forestland research be conducted at a scale
appropriate to the forest damage, and that it be conducted within the
requirements of each individual forest management plan. Our legislation
also includes requirements to ensure this research has clearly stated
forest restoration objectives and is peer reviewed by scientific
experts in forestland health.
Our legislation includes authorization for a new upland hardwood
research center designed to study the myriad of insects, disease, and
problems affecting our ability to rehabilitate, restore, and utilize
our upland hardwood forests. As we have seen, Arkansas was caught
almost flatfooted as the epidemic of oak mortality swept through the
Ozarks and severely endangered the health of our forests. Establishing
this new research center will help ensure that this does not happen
again.
The new research center will specifically research the effects of
pests and pathogens on upland hardwoods, hardwood stand regeneration
and reproductive biology, upland hardwood stand management and forest
health, threatened, endangered and sensitive aquatic and terrestrial
fauna, ecological processes and hardwood ecosystem restoration, and
education and outreach to nonindustrial private forest landowners and
associations.
The establishment of this new research center is necessary to ensure
we can quickly identify and respond to the multitude of pests, disease,
and other damaging agents that can dramatically affect our beloved
forests.
Third, our legislation also includes funding for emergency grants to
immediately remove the invasive plants that have become so pervasive
throughout this Nation's forests. And when we talk about invasive plant
species in the South, we are talking about one thing--Kudzu. Some call
it the vine that ate the South. Kudzu was brought into this country
several decades ago to be used as cover for bare hillsides and has
since spread to cover everything including shrubs, bushes, and entire
trees. The grant program included in our legislation will provide the
means for landowners to immediately remove kudzu and the myriad other
invasive plants that are choking out our forests.
Finally, our legislation also includes widely agreed upon language
that would provide for grants to remove non-commercial biomass from our
private forested watersheds, and provide for grants to establish
private, healthy forest reserves throughout the nation. Many of these
important provisions were included in the Senate-passed farm bill last
year, but they were not included in the final legislation,
unfortunately. Providing grants to remove noncommercial biomass will
immediately reduce the amount of fuel on the forest floor and directly
reduce the fire danger in our forests and around our communities.
Similarly, providing grants to protect our forest watersheds will
ensure that we can address our water quality concerns with a voluntary,
incentive based approach. And finally, providing funding to establish
new healthy forest reserves from willing private landowners will
encourage the preservation and rehabilitation of this Nation's
forestlands.
Mr. President, I believe that our bipartisan legislation will focus
needed attention on a number of extremely critical goals for our
national forest policy. One lesson that we have learned over the years
is that if we value our forests, if want to conserve our woodland and
resources, if we want to preserve their natural beauty, if we want to
ensure that the natural bounty of our forestlands is available to
future generations, then it is important that we manage those lands and
resources with a careful eye toward their long-term health.
____________________