[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 132 (Wednesday, September 24, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11914-S11917]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. CAMPBELL (for himself and Mr. Johnson):
  S. 1647. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to 
provide for direct access to audiologists for medicare beneficiaries, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation which 
would give Medicare recipients the same hearing care options available 
to veterans and Senators. Specifically, it would give Medicare 
beneficiaries direct access to qualified, licensed audiologists. I am 
pleased to be joined in this effort by my colleague, Senator Tim 
Johnson.
  Today, approximately 28 million Americans are hearing disabled. Many 
of them are older Americans--a statistic that is fast increasing with 
the aging of the ``baby boomers.'' With 80 to 90 percent of hearing 
problems not medically or surgically treatable, it seems only 
reasonable that Medicare patients be allowed to consult with an 
audiologist without first seeing another provider. It is part of 
regular audiological practice to refer patients for medical management 
when clinical indicators are present.
  In the 1990's, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and the Office 
of Personnel Management changed their respective healthcare policies to 
allow for the option of direct access to a licensed audiologist. 
Earlier this year, I wrote the VA asking if veterans were satisfied 
with that coverage for audiological services. According to the VA 
response, ``The policy has provided and continues to provide high 
quality, cost effective, and successful hearing health care to 
veterans.'' It is important to point out that this bill would not 
diminish the important role of medical doctors, or expand the scope of 
practice for audiology.
  This legislation is consumer friendly. It will help our elderly and 
rural citizens who often find it difficult to access health care 
services. It will provide consistency of policy among Government 
agencies. That is why I urge my colleagues to act quickly on 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. 1647

       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 ``Hearing Health Accessibility 
     Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. DIRECT ACCESS TO QUALIFIED AUDIOLOGISTS FOR MEDICARE 
                   BENEFICIARIES.

       Section 1861(ll)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1395x(ll)(2)) is amended by inserting before the period at 
     the end the following: ``, without regard to any requirement 
     that the individual receiving the audiology services be under 
     the care of (or referred by) a physician or other health care 
     practitioner or that such services are provided under the 
     supervision of a physician or other health care 
     practitioner''.

     SEC. 3. INCLUSION OF AUDIOLOGY SERVICES AS A PART B MEDICAL 
                   SERVICE; PAYMENT.

       (a) In General.--Section 1861(s)(2) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (U), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon at the end;
       (2) in subparagraph (V)(iii), by inserting ``and'' after 
     the semicolon at the end; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(W) audiology services (as defined in subsection 
     (ll)(2));''.
       (b) Payment Under the Physician Fee Schedule.--Section 
     1848(j)(3) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-4(j)(3)) is amended 
     by inserting ``(2)(W),'' after ``(2)(S),''.

     SEC. 4. CONSTRUCTION; EFFECTIVE DATE.

       (a) Construction.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed 
     to expand the scope of audiology services for which payment 
     may be made under title XVIII of the Social Security Act as 
     of December 31, 2003.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this Act shall 
     take effect with respect to services furnished on or after 
     January 1, 2004.

  Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, today I am happy to join my colleague, 
Senator Campbell, in introducing legislation that will provide millions 
of seniors with direct access to important audiology services through 
the Medicare Program.
  Approximately 28 million people in the U.S. have some degree of 
reduced hearing sensitivity, and of this number, 80 percent have 
irreversible hearing loss. The majority of these individuals are 65 and 
older, and as the baby boom generation ages, this number will 
skyrocket. Hearing loss is the 3rd most prevalent chronic condition in 
the older population. One in three people older than 60 and half of 
those older than 85 have a hearing loss problem and only about one-
fourth of those who could benefit from a hearing aid actually use one.
  Hearing problems can make it difficult to understand and follow a 
doctor's advice, respond to warnings, and to hear doorbells and alarms. 
They can also take away from the enjoyment of the simple things in 
life, like talking to friends and family, or listening to the radio or 
television. Additionally, the 21st century work environment requires 
intense use of communication and information skills and technologies. 
As seniors continue to remain in the workforce for longer periods, 
work-related hearing challenges will become increasingly evident and 
the individual who has a communication disability, disorder, or 
difference will be at a distinct disadvantage.
  This legislation will help seniors challenged by hearing problems 
obtain direct access to licensed audiologists through the Medicare 
Program. Because most of these hearing conditions are not medically or 
surgically treatable, direct access to audiology services will allow 
comprehensive and timely care through the diagnosis, treatment, and 
management of hearing loss. Audiologists can conduct a variety of 
specialized auditory assessments and based on such examinations, can 
present numerous options to help patients cope with hearing problems. 
This legislation will not diminish the important role of primary care 
physicians, who closely with audiologists and will remain intimately 
involved in patient care as needed under this bill.
  Direct access to such audiology services is supported by numerous 
governmental agencies. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
has recognized the importance of this issue by making access by persons 
with hearing impairments to rehabilitative services a Health People 
2010 objective. Additionally, the Veteran's Administration and Office 
of Personnel Management have established policies to allow 
beneficiaries such access. Seniors under the Medicare Program deserve 
similar benefits, and I urge my colleagues to support this important 
bill.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. FEINSTEIN:
  S. 1648. A bill to modify the date as of which certain tribal land of 
the Lytton Rancheria of California is deemed to be held in trust; to 
the Committee on Indian Affairs.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation 
that would partially repeal language from the Omnibus Indian 
Advancement Act of 2000; language that circumvents the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act's common-sense protections and regulatory safeguards 
against the inappropriate siting of Nevada-style casinos.
  In 2000, a one-paragraph provision was attached to the Omnibus Indian 
Advancement Act taking land into trust for a single Indian tribe, the 
Lytton, with the aim of allowing the tribe to expedite plans to 
establish a large gaming complex in San Pablo, CA.
  The site which is not part of, nor adjacent to, any land 
traditionally held by the Lytton is, in fact, a 10-acre property which 
includes a card club and parking lot, and is located in a major urban 
area just outside of San Francisco. The process to bring this land into 
trust and sidestep gaming oversight was done without regard for Federal 
laws currently in place to regulate the siting of such a casino.
  Today California is home to 109 federally recognized tribes. 64 
tribes have gaming compacts with the State and there are 54 tribal 
casinos. With more than 50 tribes seeking Federal recognition and 
approximately 25 recognized

[[Page S11915]]

tribes seeking gaming compacts from the Governor, revenues from 
California's tribal gaming industry are expected to be the highest of 
any State's by the end of the decade.
  I have serious reservations about the expansion of Nevada-style 
gaming--with its slot machines and in-house banking--into urban areas, 
and I am particularly concerned about off-reservation gambling and 
``reservation shopping''. Off-reservation casinos often cause counties 
additional costs in public and local services, intrude on residential 
areas, and are responsible for an increase of traffic and crime within 
local communities.
  That said, under proper regulation, gaming in California has the 
potential to yield much needed benefits for tribal members in terms of 
healthcare, education and general welfare, as Congress and California 
voters intended. However, the question is not whether gaming should be 
permitted, but rather how and where. Those questions have been 
appropriately addressed by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
  Without this legislation, the Lytton will be able to take a former 
card club and the adjacent parking lot as their reservation and turn it 
into a large gambling complex outside the regulations set up by the 
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Allowing this to happen would set a 
dangerous precedent not only for California, but every State where 
tribal gaming is permitted.
  The changes I seek today are extremely limited. This legislation 
would not reverse restoration of the tribe. It would not infringe on 
Native American sovereignty. It does not even block the casino 
proposal. It only seeks to give the State and the local communities a 
voice in the process and ensure that gaming continues to be organized 
within the framework of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
  Circumventing the processes for Federal recognition of tribal 
governments and for granting land into trust presents a variety of 
serious and critical multi-jurisdictional issues--issues which can 
negatively affect the lives of ordinary citizens and deprive local 
governments of their political power to protect their communities.
  That is why I believe it is important to seek a remedy which would 
restore the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act's oversight over the matter.
  The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act has provided this Nation with a fair 
and balanced approach to Indian gaming by facilitating tribal plans for 
economic recovery without compromising a multitude of factors that 
should be taken into account when deciding on the siting of casinos. 
This law works. It is a fair process that should continue to be 
followed.
  It is simply not asking too much to require that Lytton be subject to 
the regulatory and approval processes applicable to newly acquired 
tribal lands by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
  I hope my colleagues will support this legislation and I look forward 
to working with the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Indian Affairs 
Committee to pass this legislation quickly.
  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. 1648

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

     SECTION 1. LYTTON RANCHERIA OF CALIFORNIA.

       Section 819 of the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act (114 
     Stat. 2919) is amended by striking the last sentence.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
  S. 1649. A bill to designate the Ojito Wilderness Study Area as 
wilderness, to take certain land into trust for the Pueblo of Zia, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am proud to introduce the ``Ojito 
Wilderness Act'', a wilderness bill that has broad support in New 
Mexico. This bill designates the State's fourth Bureau of Land 
Management Wilderness area, and its first new wilderness area in more 
than 15 years. Keeping in mind Theodore Roosevelt's statement that 
``there are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness, 
that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy, and its charm,'' the Ojito 
can be described as nearly 11,000 acres of dramatic landforms and 
multi-colored rock formations, with sculptured badlands, expansive 
plateaus and mesa tops, a high density of cultural and archaeological 
sites and paleontological resources, and a diverse array of plant and 
animal species. It is an area that is big enough to get lost in, but 
small enough that it will not change the fact that only one percent of 
New Mexico's BLM lands are designated as wilderness. The bill also 
provides for the acquisition of some adjacent public lands by the 
Pueblo of Zia for preservation as public open space. I am pleased that 
the senior Senator from New Mexico, Senator Domenici, is cosponsoring 
this bill and that my distinguished colleague from the Third District 
of New Mexico, Representative Udall, is introducing a companion measure 
in the House of Representatives.
  The support for this proposal truly is impressive. It has been 
formally endorsed by the Governor of New Mexico; the local Sandoval 
County Commission and the neighboring Bernalillo County Commission; the 
Albuquerque City Council; New Mexico House of Representatives Energy 
and Natural Resources Committee Chairman James Roger Madalena; the 
Governors of the Pueblos of Zia, Santa Ana, Santo Domingo, Cochiti, 
Tesuque, San Ildefonso, Pojoaque, Nambe, Santa Clara, San Juan, Sandia, 
Laguna, Acoma, Isleta, Picuris, and Taos; the National Congress of 
American Indians; the Hopi Tribe; The Wilderness Society; the New 
Mexico Wilderness Alliance; the Coalition for New Mexico Wilderness, on 
behalf of more than 375 businesses and organizations; the Rio Grande 
Chapter of the Sierra Club; the National Parks and Conservation 
Association; the Albuquerque Convention and Visitors Bureau; 1000 
Friends of New Mexico; and numerous individuals.
  The designation of the Ojito Wilderness was recommended by Secretary 
of the Interior Manuel Lujan, Jr,.--a former New Mexico Congressman of 
20 years--in 1991. Secretary Lujan found the Ojito to have ``high 
quality wilderness values'' with ``outstanding opportunities for 
solitude and primitive and unconfined recreation,'' as well as 
``outstanding photographic and sightseeing opportunities.'' The ``close 
proximity to the Albuquerque and Santa Fe population centers, cultural 
and paleontological special features, and the lack of resource 
conflicts'' made the recommendation particularly strong. President 
George H.W. Bush concurred in the recommendation and forwarded it to 
Congress for designation. This bill adopts the boundaries recommended 
at that time, so there should be no question or dispute that all of the 
lands proposed for wilderness in this bill fully qualify for wilderness 
status under the Wilderness Act.
  This bill also takes advantage of a unique opportunity to benefit 
both the Pueblo and the public by authorizing the Pueblo to acquire 
some public lands that are sandwiched between the Zia Reservation and 
the Ojito Wilderness Study Area. The general public will benefit from 
the assurance that these lands will be protected for the future, 
forming a protective buffer around the Ojito Wilderness and providing 
additional opportunities for primitive public recreation. This bill 
secures continued public access to this open space for recreational, 
scenic, paleontological, scientific, educational, and conservation 
uses.
  While these lands are--and will remain--important to the public, they 
have special importance to the Pueblo and its people. These lands are 
part of the Pueblo's aboriginal land base, and they harbor many 
cultural, religious, historical, and archaeological sites of great 
import to the Pueblo. By acquiring these lands, the Pueblo will finally 
unite the two non-contiguous parts of its Reservation. The Pueblo may 
continue to graze its cattle on these lands, but it is prohibited from 
using the lands for housing, gaming, mining, or other commercial 
enterprises.
  The Pueblo will purchase these lands for fair market value, which 
will, of course, take into consideration the restrictions and 
prohibitions on various uses, the requirement that the natural 
characteristics of the land be preserved in perpetuity, and the 
guarantee that public access be maintained. Existing rights are 
protected, so, for example, the main access road will remain a county 
road and the existing pipelines

[[Page S11916]]

and transmission line will be unaffected. The Pueblo also has agreed to 
recognize the grazing privileges of a neighboring ranch that has the 
only other outstanding grazing permit on the lands to be transferred, 
and it is working on memorializing that agreement.
  The New Mexico Commissioner of Public Lands, Patrick H. Lyons, 
supports this transfer. In a letter endorsing the proposal, he told the 
Pueblo that it ``makes sense from a management perspective, and I 
applaud your efforts to address this matter in a cooperative manner. 
Once transferred, I am confident that the Pueblo of Zia will manage its 
acquisition with the same sensitivity with which it manages all its 
lands.'' I agree, and this bill authorizes the Pueblo to manage this 
land pursuant to regulations that are approved by the Secretary of the 
Interior.
  I am particularly pleased to introduce this legislation in 
celebration of the upcoming 40th anniversary of the Wilderness Act of 
1964 and the eightieth anniversary of the Nation's first 
administratively-designated wilderness. This celebration is 
particularly meaningful to my State of New Mexico, for it is both the 
proud birthplace of wilderness and the home to two of its fathers: Aldo 
Leopold, who worked from Albuquerque for 15 years to create in 1924 the 
Gila wilderness near my home in southern New Mexico, and New Mexico 
Senator Clinton Anderson, who was instrumental in codifying Aldo 
Leopold's wilderness and ethic 40 years later.
  Forty years later still, the Ojito provides a unique wilderness area 
that is important not only to its local stewards, but also to the 
nearby residents of Albuquerque and Santa Fe, as well as visitors from 
across the country. It is an outdoor geology laboratory, offering a 
spectacular and unique opportunity to view from a single location the 
juxtaposition of the southwestern margin of the Rocky Mountains, the 
Colorado Plateau, and the Rio Grande Rift, along with the volcanic 
necks of the Rio Puerco Fault. Its rugged terrain offers a rewarding 
challenge to hikers, backpackers, and photographers. It shelters 
ancient Puebloan ruins and an endemic endangered plant, solitude and 
inspiration.
  The words of Aldo Leopold and Senator Clinton Anderson are fitting 
for the Ojito, for it is ``what the land was, what it is, and what it 
ought to be''; let this ``Ojito Wilderness Act'' be ``a demonstration 
by our people that we can put aside a portion of this which we have as 
a tribute to the Maker and say this we will leave as we found it.''
  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. 1649

       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 ``Ojito Wilderness Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the Ojito Wilderness Study Area, located in Sandoval 
     County, New Mexico, contains dramatic landforms and rock 
     structures, multicolored badlands, expansive plateaus and 
     mesa tops, and a high density of cultural and archaeological 
     sites, paleontological resources, and diverse plant and 
     animal species;
       (2) the Bureau of Land Management evaluated the Ojito area 
     and found that the area has sufficient land area and natural 
     characteristics to qualify for full wilderness status and 
     protection;
       (3) in 1992, President George H.W. Bush concurred with the 
     recommendation of Secretary of the Interior Manuel Lujan, 
     Jr., that Congress designate the Ojito Wilderness based on 
     the high quality wilderness values, close proximity to the 
     Albuquerque and Santa Fe population centers, cultural and 
     paleontological special features, and the lack of resource 
     conflicts in the area;
       (4) the Pueblo of Zia has worked in cooperation with other 
     interested parties to reach an agreement under which the 
     Pueblo would acquire public land adjacent to the Zia 
     Reservation and the Ojito Wilderness Study Area that would--
       (A) enhance the protections for the land in the Ojito area; 
     and
       (B) ensure that the land will remain open to the public for 
     recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, 
     paleontological, and conservation uses; and
       (5) the transfer of certain parcels of public land to the 
     Pueblo of Zia and the designation of the Ojito Wilderness as 
     a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System--
       (A) is in the best interest of people of the State of New 
     Mexico and people from other States;
       (B) would preserve and maintain the Ojito as an enduring 
     resource of wilderness; and
       (C) would provide for the management and promotion of the 
     wilderness character and various resources of the Ojito area 
     for wildlife habitat protection, scenic and historic 
     preservation, scientific research and education, primitive 
     recreation, solitude, and inspiration for present and future 
     generations of the people of the United States.

     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Pueblo.--The term ``Pueblo'' means the Pueblo of Zia.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (3) State.--The term ``State'' means the State of New 
     Mexico.
       (4) Trust area map.--The term ``Trust Area map'' means the 
     map entitled ``Lands Transferred to Pueblo of Zia--
     Proposed'', numbered ____, and dated ____________.
       (5) Wilderness.--The term ``Wilderness'' means the Ojito 
     Wilderness designated under section 4.
       (6) Wilderness map.--The term ``Wilderness map'' means the 
     map entitled ``Ojito Wilderness Study Area: Ojito Proposal'', 
     numbered NM-010-024, and dated April 1990.

     SEC. 4. DESIGNATION OF THE OJITO WILDERNESS.

       (a) In General.--In furtherance of the purposes of the 
     Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1131 et seq.), there is hereby 
     designated as wilderness, and, therefore, as components of 
     the National Wilderness Preservation System, certain land in 
     the Albuquerque District-Bureau of Land Management, New 
     Mexico, which comprise approximately 10,903 acres, as 
     generally depicted on the Wilderness map, and which shall be 
     known as the ``Ojito Wilderness''.
       (b) Map and Legal Description.--The Wilderness map and a 
     legal description of the Wilderness shall--
       (1) be filed by the Secretary with the Committee on Energy 
     and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Resources of the House of Representatives as soon as 
     practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act;
       (2) have the same force and effect as if included in this 
     Act, except that the Secretary may correct clerical and 
     typographical errors in the legal description and Wilderness 
     map; and
       (3) be on file and available for public inspection in the 
     appropriate offices of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (c) Management of Wilderness.--Subject to valid existing 
     rights, the Wilderness shall be managed by the Secretary, as 
     appropriate, in accordance with the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 
     1131 et seq.) and this Act, except that, with respect to the 
     Wilderness, any reference in the Wilderness Act to the 
     effective date of the Wilderness Act shall be deemed to be a 
     reference to the date of enactment of this Act.
       (d) Management of Newly Acquired Land.--Any land within the 
     boundaries of the Wilderness that is acquired by the Federal 
     Government shall become part of the Wilderness within which 
     the land is located and shall be managed in accordance with 
     this Act and other laws applicable to the Wilderness.
       (e) Grazing.--Grazing of livestock in the Wilderness, where 
     established before the date of enactment of this Act, shall 
     be administered in accordance with the provisions of section 
     4(d)(4) of the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(d)(4)).
       (f) Fish and Wildlife.--As provided in section 4(d)(7) of 
     the Wilderness Act (16 U.S.C. 1133(d)(7)), nothing in this 
     section shall be construed as affecting the jurisdiction or 
     responsibilities of the State with respect to fish and 
     wildlife in the State.

     SEC. 5. LAND HELD IN TRUST.

       (a) In General.--Subject to valid existing rights and the 
     conditions under subsection (d), all right, title, and 
     interest of the United States in and to the lands (including 
     improvements, appurtenances, and mineral rights to the lands) 
     generally depicted on the Trust Area map shall, on receipt of 
     consideration under subsection (c) and adoption and approval 
     of regulations under subsection (d), be declared by the 
     Secretary to be held in trust by the United States for the 
     Pueblo and shall be part of the Pueblo's Reservation.
       (b) Map and Legal Description.--The Trust Area map and a 
     legal description of the land described in subsection (a) 
     shall--
       (1) be filed by the Secretary with the Committee on Energy 
     and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on 
     Resources of the House of Representatives as soon as 
     practicable after the date of the enactment of this Act;
       (2) have the same force and effect as if included in this 
     Act, except that the Secretary may correct clerical and 
     typographical errors in the legal description and Trust Area 
     map; and
       (3) be on file and available for public inspection in the 
     appropriate offices of the Bureau of Land Management.
       (c) Consideration.--
       (1) In general.--In consideration for the conveyance 
     authorized under subsection (a),

[[Page S11917]]

     the Pueblo shall pay to the Secretary the amount that is 
     equal to the fair market value of the land conveyed, as 
     subject to the terms and conditions in subsection (d), as 
     determined by an independent appraisal.
       (2) Availability.--Any amounts paid under paragraph (1) 
     shall be available to the Secretary, without further 
     appropriation and until expended, for the acquisition from 
     willing sellers of land or interests in land in the State.
       (d) Public Access.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the declaration 
     of trust and conveyance under subsection (a) shall be subject 
     to the continuing right of the public to access the land for 
     recreational, scenic, scientific, educational, 
     paleontological, and conservation uses, subject to any 
     regulations for land management and the preservation, 
     protection, and enjoyment of the natural characteristics of 
     the land that are adopted by the Pueblo and approved by the 
     Secretary.
       (2) Conditions.--
       (A) In general.--The land conveyed under subsection (a) 
     shall be maintained as open space, and the natural 
     characteristics of the land shall be preserved in perpetuity.
       (B) Prohibited uses.--The use of motorized vehicles (except 
     on existing roads or as is necessary for the maintenance and 
     repair of facilities used in connection with grazing 
     operations), mineral extraction, housing, gaming, and other 
     commercial enterprises shall be prohibited within the 
     boundaries of the land conveyed under subsection (a).
       (e) Judicial Relief.--
       (1) In general.--To enforce subsection (d), any person may 
     bring a civil action in the United States District Court for 
     the District of New Mexico seeking declaratory or injunctive 
     relief.
       (2) Sovereign immunity.--The Pueblo shall not assert 
     sovereign immunity as a defense or bar to a civil action 
     brought under paragraph (1).
       (3) Effect.--Nothing in this section--
       (A) authorizes a civil action against the Pueblo for money 
     damages, costs, or attorneys fees; or
       (B) except as provided in paragraph (2), abrogates the 
     sovereign immunity of the Pueblo.
       (f) Effect.--Nothing in this section shall have the effect 
     of terminating or affecting the renewal of any validly issued 
     right-of-way or the customary operation, maintenance, repair, 
     and replacement activities in such right-of-way, issued, 
     granted, or permitted by the Secretary on the date of 
     enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. INOUYE:
  S. 1653. A bill to ensure that recreational benefits are given the 
same priority as hurricane and storm damage reduction benefits and 
environmental restoration benefits; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.
  Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the National Beach 
Recreation and Economic Benefits Act. This measure would require the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Army Corps, to give recreational benefits 
the same priority as hurricane and storm damage reduction benefits when 
justifying beach restoration projects.
  The Army Corps performs a valuable service in protecting our nation's 
beaches against erosion. They have effectively restored and repaired 
damaged beaches for over the past 50 years. Unfortunately, under 
current policy, the Army Corps only authorizes and funds beach 
restoration projects that protect property against storm and hurricane 
damage. The Army Corps does not recommend authorization or funding of 
beach restoration projects that only provide recreational benefits.
  Beaches help support tourism and serve as an important source of fun 
for many Americans who seek inexpensive recreation. Many of these 
beaches are not eligible for beach restoration because they lack 
sufficient structural development along coastlines to warrant a 
restoration project solely on the basis of storm or hurricane damage 
reduction. While local governments and communities have taken proactive 
measures to avert flood damage, they are being denied the much needed 
beach restoration assistance by the Army Corps.
  In addition, by limiting beach restoration projects to storm and 
hurricane damage reduction, the Army Corps has established a policy 
that inadvertently aids more developed shorelines than others. The 
method for determining storm and hurricane damage reduction benefits is 
based on the assessed value of the private property and public 
infrastructure immediately adjacent to the beach. Therefore, the 
benefits will be much higher for densely developed shorelines than less 
densely developed shorelines. For example, a high-rise residential 
condominium or hotel would provide more storm reduction benefits than a 
single family home.
  Accordingly, the National Beach Recreation and Economic Benefits Act 
will ensure that recreation benefits are accorded the same 
considerations as storm and hurricane damage reduction benefits. I urge 
my colleagues to support this measure. 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. 1653

       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 Beach Recreation 
     and Economic Benefits Act''.

     SEC. 2. GOALS TO BE ADDRESSED IN PLANNING OF WATER RESOURCE 
                   PROJECTS.

       Section 904 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 
     (33 U.S.C. 2281) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 904. GOALS TO BE ADDRESSED IN PLANNING OF WATER 
                   RESOURCE PROJECTS.

       ``(a) In General.--Each of the goals of enhancing national 
     economic development, the quality of the total environment, 
     the well-being of the people of the United States, the 
     prevention of loss of life, and the preservation of cultural 
     and historical values shall be addressed in the formulation 
     and evaluation of water resources projects to be carried out 
     by the Secretary.
       ``(b) Display of Associated Benefits and Costs.--The 
     quantifiable and unquantifiable costs and benefits associated 
     with the goals relating to water resources projects described 
     in subsection (a) shall be displayed in any analysis of the 
     costs and benefits of those projects.''.

     SEC. 3. GIVING RECREATIONAL BENEFITS THE SAME STATUS AS OTHER 
                   BEACH RESTORATION BENEFITS.

       Subsection (e)(2)(B) of the first section of the Act of 
     August 13, 1946 (33 U.S.C. 426e(e)(2)(B)), is amended by 
     striking clause (ii) and inserting the following:
       ``(ii) Considerations; procedures.--In making 
     recommendations relating to shore protection projects under 
     clause (i), the Secretary shall--

       ``(I) consider the economic and ecological benefits of the 
     shore protection projects; and
       ``(II) develop and implement procedures for the 
     determination of national economic benefits that treat 
     benefits provided for recreation, hurricane and storm damage 
     reduction, and environmental restoration equally.''.

                          ____________________