[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 144 (Wednesday, October 15, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12609-S12622]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. Domenici:
  S. 1732. A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to establish 
a rural water supply program in the Reclamation States to provide a 
clean, safe, affordable, and reliable water supply to rural residents; 
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that is 
critical to rural America and long overdue. My bill would help to 
ensure that our rural communities continue to thrive and flourish by 
guaranteeing a safe, reliable water supply.
  There is no comprehensive program in existence that rural communities 
can tap into to meet increasing demands for rural water infrastructure. 
My bill will remedy this problem by creating such a program within the 
Department of the Interior, specifically in the Bureau of Reclamation. 
My bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to undertake a 
competitive program to plan, design, and construct rural water supply 
projects in conjunction with non-Federal local entities.
  To date, there is no Federal program specifically in place with the 
purpose of meeting the rural water needs of communities and tribes. As 
a result, we either offer piece meal help through EPA grants or 
communities turn to other programs that were originally designed for 
other purposes.
  In the State of New Mexico alone, there are numerous projects that 
would benefit from a program such as the one I propose in this bill. 
Let me just share one example with you--the community of Chimayo, NM. 
Chimayo is in northern New Mexico tucked in the foothills of the 
beautiful Sangre de Christo Mountains. This historic and picturesque 
community is over 400 years old. Today, the small community of less 
than 3000 people is forced to haul water because they lack adequate 
infrastructure to service their homes. I know that other States in the 
west have communities with similar needs.
  My bill requires the Secretary to look at whether or not a community 
has an urgent and compelling need, whether construction of a rural 
water system would help alleviate future water supply shortages, 
whether it would help improve health of water quality to name just a 
few. Additionally, my bill is based on the communities capability to 
pay. Again, I will speak about New Mexico where many of these 
communities are among the poorest. Yet, I don't believe that should 
preclude them from the most basic resource--a safe and reliable 
drinking water supply.
  I know that many are aware of the on-going drought conditions in the 
west. Our best experts have predicted that this will only get worse. 
Many of America's rural communities are being hit the hardest by these 
worsening drought conditions. I believe my bill goes a long way in 
helping these already struggling communities. This issue is of such 
huge importance to me, that I intend to ask Senator Murkowski to hold a 
Water and Power Subcommittee hearing on this bill as early as next 
week. We have critical needs that need to be addressed and I urge my 
fellow Senators to help ensure that we can indeed meet them.
  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. 1732

       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 Reclamation Rural Water 
     Supply Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) Construct.--The term ``construct'' means to--
       (A) install new infrastructure; and
       (B) upgrade or replace existing facilities that are 
     associated with the new infrastructure authorized under this 
     Act.
       (2) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' means any 
     Indian entity that is--
       (A) included on the list of recognized tribes that the 
     Secretary publishes in the Federal Register in accordance 
     with section 104 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe 
     List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a-1); and
       (B) recognized by the Secretary as eligible to receive 
     services from the Federal Government.
       (3) Non-federal project entity.--The term ``non-Federal 
     project entity'' means a State, regional, or local authority, 
     Indian tribe, or other qualifying entity, such as a water 
     conservation district, water conservancy district, or rural 
     water district or association.
       (4) Program.--The term ``program'' means the rural water 
     supply program established under section 3(a).
       (5) Project.--
       (A) In general.--The term ``project'' means a water supply 
     project for communities, an Indian tribe, or dispersed 
     homesites with domestic or rural water.
       (B) Inclusion.--The term ``project'' includes incidental 
     livestock watering.
       (6) Reclamation law.--The term ``Reclamation law'' means 
     the Act of June 17, 1902 (32 Stat. 388, chapter 1093), and 
     Acts supplemental to and amendatory of that Act (43 U.S.C. 
     371 et seq.)).
       (7) Reclamation state.--The term ``Reclamation State'' 
     means each of the States identified in the first section of 
     the Act of June 17, 1902 (43 U.S.C. 391).
       (8) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.

     SEC. 3. RURAL WATER SUPPLY PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in cooperation with non-
     Federal project entities, may carry out a rural water supply 
     program to plan, design, and construct projects in 
     Reclamation States.
       (b) Eligibility Criteria.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall develop and publish in 
     the Federal Register criteria for determining the eligibility 
     of a project for assistance under the program.
       (2) Considerations.--The criteria developed under paragraph 
     (1) shall take into account such factors as--
       (A) whether a project serves--
       (i) rural areas and communities; or
       (ii) Indian tribes;

[[Page S12610]]

       (B) whether there is an urgent and compelling need for a 
     project that would--
       (i) result in continuous, measurable, and significant water 
     quality benefits;
       (ii) address current or future water supply shortages; or
       (iii) improve the health or aesthetic quality of water;
       (C) whether a project helps meet any applicable legal 
     requirements;
       (D) whether a project--
       (i) promotes and applies a regional or watershed 
     perspective to water resource management or cross-boundary 
     issues;
       (ii) implements an integrated resources management 
     approach;
       (iii) increases water management flexibility; or
       (iv) forms a partnership with other entities; and
       (E) whether a project provides benefits outside the region 
     in which the project is carried out.
       (c) Cost-Sharing Requirement.--
       (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of the 
     planning and construction of a project shall be the amount 
     established by the Secretary in the feasibility report for 
     the project under section 5(c)(1)(D)(i).
       (2) Non-federal share.--
       (A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), 
     the non-Federal share shall be not less than 25 percent of 
     the cost of planning and construction of the project, but not 
     more than the amount established by the Secretary in the 
     feasibility report for the project under section 
     5(c)(1)(D)(i).
       (B) Reduced non-federal share.--The Secretary may reduce 
     the non-Federal share of the cost of the planning and 
     construction of a project under subparagraph (A) if the 
     Secretary determines that the amount of the non-Federal share 
     required by that subparagraph would result in economic 
     hardship for the non-Federal project entity.
       (C) Limitation.--Grants from other Federal sources shall 
     not be credited toward the non-Federal share required by this 
     paragraph.

     SEC. 4. APPRAISAL INVESTIGATIONS.

       (a) In General.--On request of a non-Federal project 
     entity, the Secretary, in cooperation with the non-Federal 
     project entity and in consultation with appropriate State, 
     regional, local, and tribal authorities, may conduct an 
     appraisal investigation of a project to determine whether--
       (1) the project meets the criteria developed under section 
     (3)(b); and
       (2) the Secretary should initiate a feasibility study under 
     section 5(a).
       (b) Report.--On completion of the investigation under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall prepare an appraisal 
     report that includes any recommendations of the Secretary 
     with respect to whether a feasibility study should be 
     initiated for the project under section 5(a).
       (c) Costs.--The Secretary shall pay the costs of any 
     appraisal investigations conducted under this section.

     SEC. 5. FEASIBILITY STUDIES.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary, in cooperation with a non-
     Federal project entity, may carry out studies to determine 
     the feasibility of rural water supply systems recommended for 
     study under section 4(b).
       (b) Study Considerations.--In conducting a feasibility 
     study under this section, the Secretary shall consider--
       (1) the need for the proposed project;
       (2) short- and long-term water demand and supplies in the 
     study area;
       (3) an evaluation of whether the resources in the study 
     area are capable of providing a safe and reliable source of 
     potable water to the communities and rural areas to be 
     served;
       (4) any reasonable alternatives to the proposed project 
     (including nonstructural alternatives) that satisfy the need 
     for action, including an alternative that is within the 
     ability of the non-Federal project entity to pay operation, 
     maintenance, and repair costs of the proposed project;
       (5) the economic feasibility and cost effectiveness of the 
     proposed project;
       (6) impacts of the proposed project on the natural and 
     human environment;
       (7) appropriate water conservation measures; and
       (8) the financial ability of the non-Federal project entity 
     to pay--
       (A) the non-Federal share of any planning and construction 
     costs of the proposed project; and
       (B) 100 percent of the operation, maintenance, and 
     replacement costs allocated under subsection (c)(1)(C)(i).
       (c) Report.--
       (1) In general.--On completion of a feasibility study under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall prepare a report that--
       (A) describes the engineering, environmental, and economic 
     activities of the Secretary carried out under the study;
       (B) takes into consideration--
       (i) the range of potential solutions for, and the 
     circumstances and needs of, the area to be served by the 
     proposed project;
       (ii) the potential benefits to the people of the study 
     area; and
       (iii) appropriate water conservation measures;
       (C) includes a schedule that identifies--
       (i) the amount of operation, maintenance, and replacement 
     costs that should be allocated to each non-Federal project 
     entity participating in the project; and
       (ii) the current and expected financial ability of each 
     non-Federal project entity to pay the allocated operation, 
     maintenance, and replacement costs;
       (D)(i) specifies the Federal and non-Federal share of the 
     planning and construction costs of the project; and
       (ii) allocates the non-Federal share among project 
     beneficiaries; and
       (E) includes the recommendations of the Secretary as to 
     whether the project should be carried out under this Act.
       (2) Submission to Congress.--With respect to any project 
     that the Secretary recommends under paragraph (1)(E), the 
     Secretary shall submit to Congress--
       (A) the feasibility report for the proposed project 
     prepared under paragraph (1);
       (B) any environmental reports associated with the proposed 
     project; and
       (C) a request to develop and construct the proposed 
     project, as appropriate.
       (d) Priorities.--The Secretary shall establish priorities 
     for carrying out projects under this Act based on--
       (1) the extent to which the project takes advantage of--
       (A) economic incentives; and
       (B) the use of market-based mechanisms;
       (2) the cost benefit of the project versus other 
     alternatives such as desalination;
       (3) whether non-Federal project entities have adequate 
     fiscal controls in place to manage the project; and
       (4) the extent to which the project involves partnerships.
       (e) Cost-sharing requirement.--
       (1) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of a 
     feasibility study carried out under this section shall not 
     exceed 50 percent of the study costs.
       (2) Form of non-federal share.--The non-Federal share under 
     paragraph (1) may be in the form of any in-kind services that 
     the Secretary determines would contribute substantially 
     toward the conduct and completion of the study.
       (f) Reimbursement of costs.--If a project is constructed 
     under the program, the Federal share of feasibility studies 
     shall be--
       (1) considered to be project costs; and
       (2) reimbursed in accordance with Reclamation law.

     SEC. 6. OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPLACEMENT COSTS.

       (a) In General.--To be eligible to carry out a project 
     under this Act, a non-Federal project entity shall establish, 
     to the satisfaction of the Secretary, that the non-Federal 
     project entity has the ability to pay all operation, 
     maintenance, and replacement costs of the project facilities.
       (b) Plan.--The non-Federal project entity, in consultation 
     with the Secretary, shall develop an operation, maintenance, 
     and replacement plan to provide the necessary framework to 
     assist the non-Federal project entity in establishing rates 
     and fees for project beneficiaries.

     SEC. 7. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

       (a) Authority of Secretary.--The Secretary may enter into 
     contracts, financial assistance agreements, and such other 
     agreements, and promulgate such regulations, as are necessary 
     to carry out this Act.
       (b) Limitation on Use of Funds.--None of the funds made 
     available to the Secretary for planning or construction of a 
     rural water supply project developed under the program may be 
     used to plan or construct facilities used to supply water for 
     irrigation.
       (c) Title to projects.--Title to the components of rural 
     water supply projects planned, designed, and constructed 
     under the program shall be held by the non-Federal project 
     entity.

     SEC. 8. EFFECT ON FEDERAL RECLAMATION LAW.

       Nothing in this Act supersedes or amends--
       (1) Reclamation law; or
       (2) any Federal law associated with a project, or portion 
     of a project constructed under Reclamation law.

     SEC. 9. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       (a) In General.--There is authorized to be appropriated to 
     carry out this Act $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and each 
     fiscal year thereafter.
       (b) Construction Cost Indexing.--
       (1) In general.--Any amounts appropriated for the planning 
     and construction of projects under this Act shall include 
     such sums as are necessary to defray increases in development 
     costs reflected in appropriate engineering cost indices after 
     the completion date of the applicable feasibility report, to 
     remain available until expended.
       (2) Cost sharing.--The Federal and non-Federal share of 
     cost increases due to inflation shall be allocated in amounts 
     that are proportionate to the allocation determined under 
     section 3(c).
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. KOHL (for himself and Mr. Kennedy):
  S. 1733. A bill to authorize the Attorney General to award grants to 
States to develop and implement State court interpreter programs; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the State Court 
Interpreters Grant Program Act of 2003. This bill would create a modest 
Federal grant program to support the State court interpreter services. 
Currently, court interpreting services vary greatly by State--some 
States have highly developed programs, others are trying to get 
programs running but lack adequate funds, and still others have no 
program at all. This inconsistency creates the potential for poorly

[[Page S12611]]

translated court proceedings, or court proceedings that are not 
translated at all. It is critical that we protect the constitutional 
right to a fair trial by funding State court interpreter programs.
  According to the 2000 Census, 18 percent of the population over age 
five speaks a language other than English at home. As these individuals 
with limited English proficiency come into the court system to seek 
redress or to defend themselves against allegations of civil or 
criminal wrongdoing, it is critical to the fair administration of 
justice that they be able to understand their court proceedings.
  At the Federal level, court interpreting services are provided as 
needed by trained and certified interpreters. Similarly, some States 
have robust and effective court interpreter programs in their State 
courts. These States recruit, train, test and certify individuals in 
all necessary languages. However, many States have limited programs 
which may test and certify interpreters for only one language. Such 
States may have only a small number of interpreters certified to 
interpret courtroom proceedings. Still other States have no program at 
all. We have heard horror stories of ``amateur'' interpreters 
attempting to translate courtroom events. For example, the Philadelphia 
Inquirer reports: ``In one juvenile court, a juvenile defendant had to 
interpret for his parents. In a Monroe County [Pennsylvania] court, a 
member of an anti-domestic violence group was asked to interpret for an 
alleged victim, despite having a clear bias.''
  The skills required of a court interpreter differ significantly from 
those required of other interpreters or translators. Legal English is a 
highly particularized area of the language, and requires special 
training. Although anyone with fluency in a foreign language could 
attempt to translate a court proceeding, the best interpreters are 
those that have been tested and certified as official court 
interpreters.
  A lack of qualified interpreters can create serious problems in the 
justice system. For example, a poorly interpreted trial may be appealed 
on the grounds that justice was not administered fairly. Those appeals 
clog up the courts. In addition, where there are inadequate resources 
available, interpreters may not be able to keep up with the caseload 
and trials may be delayed unreasonably and in violation of a 
defendant's right to a speedy trial.
  This is not just a State issue. First and foremost, the right to a 
fair trial is a federally protected right under the Constitution. The 
Federal Government therefore has a role to play in ensuring that State 
courts are holding fair trials. In addition, State budget crises have 
reduced the ability of the courts to pay for interpreter services. At 
the same time, requests for interpreter services have skyrocketed over 
the past several years all around the country. Although Spanish is by 
far the most requested language to be translated in courtrooms, court 
officials report regular or occasional need for Russian, German, 
French, Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese, Taiwanese, Korean, Vietnamese, 
Afghani, Armenian, Punjabi, Hindi, Arabic, Somali, Polish and many 
other languages. The coincidence of budget cuts and increased demand 
threatens federally-guaranteed due process and justifies Federal 
assistance.
  This legislation addresses this problem by authorizing $15 million 
for each of the next five fiscal years for a grant program to the 
States. Those States that apply would be eligible for a $100,000 base 
grant allotment. In addition, $5 million would be set aside for States 
that demonstrate extraordinary need. The remainder of the money would 
be distributed on a formula basis determined by the percentage of 
persons in that State over the age of five who speak a language other 
than English at home.
  Support for this legislation comes from State court administrators 
across the country. In fact, the Conference of Chief Justices and 
Conference of State Court Administrators this summer adopted a 
resolution urging Congress to establish a national program to assist 
State courts in providing court interpreters services.
  I hope my colleagues will help the court systems in their States to 
provide critical court interpreting services to their constituents.
  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. 1733

       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 ``State Court Interpreter 
     Grant Program Act''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds that--
       (1) the fair administration of justice depends on the 
     ability of all participants in a courtroom proceeding to 
     understand that proceeding, regardless of their English 
     proficiency;
       (2) 18 percent of the population of the United States over 
     5 years of age speaks a language other than English at home;
       (3) only qualified court interpreters can ensure that 
     persons with limited English proficiency comprehend judicial 
     proceedings in which they are a party;
       (4) the knowledge and skills required of a qualified court 
     interpreter differ substantially from those required in other 
     interpretation settings, such as social service, medical, 
     diplomatic, and conference interpreting;
       (5) the Federal Government has demonstrated its commitment 
     to equal administration of justice regardless of English 
     proficiency;
       (6) Executive Order 13166, issued August 11, 2000, requires 
     Federal Agencies, including courts, to improve access for 
     persons who have limited English proficiency;
       (7) 29 States have developed, or are developing, court 
     interpreting programs;
       (8) robust, effective court interpreter programs--
       (A) actively recruit skilled individuals to be court 
     interpreters;
       (B) train those individuals in the interpretation of court 
     proceedings;
       (C) develop and use a thorough, systematic certification 
     process for court interpreters;
       (D) have sufficient funding to ensure that a qualified 
     interpreter will be available to the court whenever 
     necessary; and
       (9) Federal funding is necessary to--
       (A) encourage States that do not have court interpreter 
     programs to develop them;
       (B) assist States with nascent court interpreter programs 
     to implement them;
       (C) assist States with limited court interpreter programs 
     to enhance them; and
       (D) assist States with robust court interpreter programs to 
     make further improvements and share successful programs with 
     other States.

     SEC. 3. STATE COURT INTERPRETER PROGRAM.

       (a) Grants Authorized.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Office of Justice 
     Programs of the Department of Justice (referred to in this 
     section as the ``Administrator'') shall make grants, in 
     accordance with such regulations as the Attorney General may 
     prescribe, to States to develop and implement programs to 
     assist individuals with limited English proficiency to access 
     and understand State court proceedings in which they are a 
     party.
       (2) Technical assistance.--The Administrator shall 
     allocate, for each fiscal year, $500,000 of the amount 
     appropriated pursuant to section 4 to be used to establish a 
     court interpreter technical assistance program to assist 
     States receiving grants under this Act.
       (b) Use of Grants.--Grants awarded pursuant to subsection 
     (a) may be used by States to--
       (1) assess regional language demands;
       (2) develop a court interpreter program for the State;
       (3) develop, institute, and administer language 
     certification examinations;
       (4) recruit, train, and certify qualified court 
     interpreters;
       (5) pay for salaries, transportation, and technology 
     necessary to implement the court interpreter program 
     developed pursuant to paragraph (2); and
       (6) engage in other related activities, as prescribed by 
     the Attorney General.
       (c) Application.--Each State desiring a grant under this 
     section shall submit an application to the Administrator at 
     such time, in such manner, and accompanied by such 
     information as the Administrator may reasonably require.
       (d) State Allotments.--
       (1) Base allotment.--From amounts appropriated for each 
     fiscal year pursuant to section 4, the Administrator shall 
     allocate $100,000 to each State, which has an application 
     approved under subsection (c).
       (2) Discretionary allotment.--From amounts appropriated for 
     each fiscal year pursuant to section 4, the Administrator 
     shall allocate a total of $5,000,000 to the States that have 
     extraordinary needs that must be addressed in order to 
     develop, implement, or expand a State court interpreter 
     program.
       (3) Additional allotment.--In addition to the allocations 
     made under paragraphs (1) and (2), the Administrator shall 
     allocate to each State, which has an application approved 
     under subsection (c), an amount equal to the product reached 
     by multiplying--
       (A) the unallocated balance of the amount appropriated for 
     each fiscal year pursuant to section 4; and

[[Page S12612]]

       (B) the ratio between the number of people over 5 years of 
     age who speak a language other than English at home in the 
     State and the number of people over 5 years of age who speak 
     a language other than English at home in all the States that 
     receive an allocation under paragraph (1), as those numbers 
     are determined by the Bureau of the Census.

     SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated $15,000,000 for 
     each of the fiscal years 2005 through 2008 to carry out this 
     Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 1734. A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security 
Act to provide States with the option to expand or add coverage of 
pregnant women under the medicaid and State children's health insurance 
programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
   Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce the Prevent 
Prematurity and Improve Child Health Act of 2003, which seeks to reduce 
the incidence of prematurity and improve the health of women of 
childbearing age and children. I am joined in this effort today by my 
colleagues Senators Richard Lugar and Jeff Bingaman.
   The number of premature births is increasing at an alarming rate. 
According to data from the National Center for Health Statistics, more 
than 476,000 infants were born prematurely in 2001--a 27 percent 
increase since 1981 and the highest level ever reported in the United 
States. Prematurity, which is defined as birth at less than 37 
completed weeks of gestation, is the leading cause of infant death in 
the first month of life. Today, one in eight infants is born too early. 
Unfortunately, in my own State of Arkansas, the problem of preterm 
births is even more astounding. In 2001, more than 13 percent of births 
were preterm, ranking Arkansas 43rd in the Nation. This is a clear 
wake-up call: we must take action to reduce the number of premature 
births, improving the health of hundreds of thousands of infants born 
each year. Not to mention the cost savings that will result from 
bringing healthy babies into the world.
  This legislation I introduced today gives States increased 
flexibility and the Federal resources needed to improve access to 
prenatal care for low-income pregnant women. Specifically, it will give 
States new options to cover pregnant women under the State Children's 
Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) and to cover low-income legal 
immigrant pregnant women and children under Medicaid and SCHIP. At 
least one in eight pregnant women are uninsured, according to a 1999 
study conducted by Emory University professor Ken Thorpe for the March 
of Dimes. Uninsured women receive fewer prenatal services and report 
greater difficulty in obtaining needed care than women with insurance, 
an Institute of Medicine study concluded. The National Center for 
Health Statistics reports that infants born to mothers who received 
late or no prenatal care in 2000 were about twice as likely to be low 
birthweight, less than 5\1/2\ pounds, as infants born to mothers who 
received early prenatal care--9.9 percent compared with 5.5 percent. 
Timing of entry into prenatal care often reflects factors also 
associated with low birthweight, including maternal age and poverty. 
Increased access to prenatal care will give women greater access to 
screening and diagnostic tests as well as education, counseling, and 
referral services to reduce risky behaviors like substance abuse and 
poor nutrition. Such care may thus help improve the health of both 
mothers and their infants.
   Premature birth can happen to any family. In fact, nearly half of 
premature births have no known cause. but we do know that a whole host 
of factors are associated with increased risk, including maternal age, 
multiple births, a history of preterm delivery, stress, infection, 
smoking and drug use.
  Additionally, this bill tackles a major prematurity risk factor--
maternal smoking--by improving and expanding coverage for 
pharmaceuticals and counseling that will help income-eligible pregnant 
women enrolled in the program quit smoking. Almost 20 percent of 
pregnant women ages 15 to 44 smoke, according to the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention. But pregnancy is a powerful motivator 
to help women stop smoking. Women who smoke are more likely to stop 
during pregnancy, both spontaneously and with assistance, than at any 
other time. According to the Surgeon General, programs to help pregnant 
women quit smoking can increase cessation rates, benefiting infant 
health, and are cost-effective. Yet many States' Medicaid programs do 
not reimburse counseling services aimed at helping pregnant smokers 
understand the medical consequences their smoking can have on their 
unborn child and giving them the tools they need to quit. For some 
pregnant women, counseling is not enough and a physician may prescribe 
pharmaceuticals. At least 35 States already include at least one type 
of smoking cessation pharmaceutical in their Medicaid programs. This 
bill will require all States to include these drugs that, when 
prescribed by a physician, can help pregnant women stop smoking.
  The bill also contains a provision directing the Administrator of the 
Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to review the core 
performance measures in the Maternal and Child Health block grant and 
determine if there are sufficient prematurity-related measures, 
including the percentage of infants born to mothers that smoke while 
pregnant.
  This bill also gives States the tools they need to help low-income 
women enrolled in Medicaid avoid another risk factor for premature 
birth--spacing pregnancies too close together. In recent years, a 
number of States, including Arkansas, have sought and received Federal 
permission in the form of waivers to provide Medicaid-financed family 
planning services and supplies to income-eligible uninsured residents 
whose incomes are above the state's regular Medicaid eligibility 
ceilings. This bill would make it possible for States to extend 
Medicaid coverage for family planning services without having to obtain 
a federal waiver.
  Finally, the bill will improve the health care of some infants and 
children with disabilities, such as those born prematurely, who have 
private health insurance with limited benefits that do not meet their 
health needs. Currently, infants and children must be uninsured to be 
eligible for SCHIP. However, this provision will give states the 
ability to use federal funds available under SCHIP to include income-
eligible underinsured infants and children in SCHIP, as is currently 
permitted in Medicaid. This secondary payer provision will allow 
children to continue to be enrolled in their family's private health 
policy, and at the same time obtain the full spectrum of health 
services they need.
  I encourage my colleagues to join us as supporters of this important 
legislation to give states the tools they need to reduce the rate of 
premature births and improve the health care of pregnant women, infants 
and children across the nation.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the 
Prevent Prematurity and Improve Child Health Act be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1734

       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 ``Prevent Prematurity and 
     Improve Child Health Act of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. STATE OPTION TO EXPAND OR ADD COVERAGE OF CERTAIN 
                   PREGNANT WOMEN UNDER MEDICAID AND SCHIP.

       (a) Medicaid.--
       (1) Authority to expand coverage.--Section 1902(l)(2)(A)(i) 
     of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(l)(2)(A)(i)) is 
     amended by inserting ``(or such higher percentage as the 
     State may elect for purposes of expenditures for medical 
     assistance for pregnant women described in section 
     1905(u)(4)(A))'' after ``185 percent''.
       (2) Enhanced matching funds available if certain conditions 
     met.--Section 1905 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1396d) is amended--
       (A) in the fourth sentence of subsection (b), by striking 
     ``or subsection (u)(3)'' and inserting ``, (u)(3), or 
     (u)(4)''; and
       (B) in subsection (u)--
       (i) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (ii) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(4) For purposes of the fourth sentence of subsection (b) 
     and section 2105(a), the expenditures described in this 
     paragraph are the following:

[[Page S12613]]

       ``(A) Certain pregnant women.--If the conditions described 
     in subparagraph (B) are met, expenditures for medical 
     assistance for pregnant women described in subsection (n) or 
     under section 1902(l)(1)(A) in a family the income of which 
     exceeds 185 percent of the poverty line, but does not exceed 
     the income eligibility level established under title XXI for 
     a targeted low-income child.
       ``(B) Conditions.--The conditions described in this 
     subparagraph are the following:
       ``(i) The State plans under this title and title XXI do not 
     provide coverage for pregnant women described in subparagraph 
     (A) with higher family income without covering such pregnant 
     women with a lower family income.
       ``(ii) The State does not apply an effective income level 
     for pregnant women that is lower than the effective income 
     level (expressed as a percent of the poverty line and 
     considering applicable income disregards) that has been 
     specified under the State plan under subsection 
     (a)(10)(A)(i)(III) or (l)(2)(A) of section 1902, as of 
     January 1, 2003, to be eligible for medical assistance as a 
     pregnant woman.
       ``(C) Definition of poverty line.--In this subsection, the 
     term `poverty line' has the meaning given such term in 
     section 2110(c)(5).''.
       (3) Payment from title xxi allotment for medicaid expansion 
     costs; elimination of counting medicaid child presumptive 
     eligibility costs against title xxi allotment.--Section 
     2105(a)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1397ee(a)(1)) is amended--
       (A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking 
     ``(or, in the case of expenditures described in subparagraph 
     (B), the Federal medical assistance percentage (as defined in 
     the first sentence of section 1905(b)))''; and
       (B) by striking subparagraph (B) and inserting the 
     following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) for the provision of medical assistance that is 
     attributable to expenditures described in section 
     1905(u)(4)(A);''.
       (b) SCHIP.--
       (1) Coverage.--Title XXI of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1397aa et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following new section:

     ``SEC. 2111. OPTIONAL COVERAGE OF TARGETED LOW-INCOME 
                   PREGNANT WOMEN.

       ``(a) Optional Coverage.--Notwithstanding any other 
     provision of this title, a State may provide for coverage, 
     through an amendment to its State child health plan under 
     section 2102, of pregnancy-related assistance for targeted 
     low-income pregnant women in accordance with this section, 
     but only if--
       ``(1) the State has established an income eligibility level 
     for pregnant women under subsection (a)(10)(A)(i)(III) or 
     (l)(2)(A) of section 1902 that is at least 185 percent of the 
     income official poverty line; and
       ``(2) the State meets the conditions described in section 
     1905(u)(4)(B).
       ``(b) Definitions.--For purposes of this title:
       ``(1) Pregnancy-related assistance.--The term `pregnancy-
     related assistance' has the meaning given the term child 
     health assistance in section 2110(a) as if any reference to 
     targeted low-income children were a reference to targeted 
     low-income pregnant women, except that the assistance shall 
     be limited to services related to pregnancy (which include 
     prenatal, delivery, and postpartum services and services 
     described in section 1905(a)(4)(C)) and to other conditions 
     that may complicate pregnancy.
       ``(2) Targeted low-income pregnant woman.--The term 
     `targeted low-income pregnant woman' means a woman--
       ``(A) during pregnancy and through the end of the month in 
     which the 60-day period (beginning on the last day of her 
     pregnancy) ends;
       ``(B) whose family income exceeds the effective income 
     level (expressed as a percent of the poverty line and 
     considering applicable income disregards) that has been 
     specified under subsection (a)(10)(A)(i)(III) or (l)(2)(A) of 
     section 1902, as of January 1, 2003, to be eligible for 
     medical assistance as a pregnant woman under title XIX but 
     does not exceed the income eligibility level established 
     under the State child health plan under this title for a 
     targeted low-income child; and
       ``(C) who satisfies the requirements of paragraphs (1)(A), 
     (1)(C), (2), and (3) of section 2110(b).
       ``(c) References to Terms and Special Rules.--In the case 
     of, and with respect to, a State providing for coverage of 
     pregnancy-related assistance to targeted low-income pregnant 
     women under subsection (a), the following special rules 
     apply:
       ``(1) Any reference in this title (other than in subsection 
     (b)) to a targeted low-income child is deemed to include a 
     reference to a targeted low-income pregnant woman.
       ``(2) Any such reference to child health assistance with 
     respect to such women is deemed a reference to pregnancy-
     related assistance.
       ``(3) Any such reference to a child is deemed a reference 
     to a woman during pregnancy and the period described in 
     subsection (b)(2)(A).
       ``(4) In applying section 2102(b)(3)(B), any reference to 
     children found through screening to be eligible for medical 
     assistance under the State medicaid plan under title XIX is 
     deemed a reference to pregnant women.
       ``(5) There shall be no exclusion of benefits for services 
     described in subsection (b)(1) based on any preexisting 
     condition and no waiting period (including any waiting period 
     imposed to carry out section 2102(b)(3)(C)) shall apply.
       ``(6) Subsection (a) of section 2103 (relating to required 
     scope of health insurance coverage) shall not apply insofar 
     as a State limits coverage to services described in 
     subsection (b)(1) and the reference to such section in 
     section 2105(a)(1)(C) is deemed not to require, in such case, 
     compliance with the requirements of section 2103(a).
       ``(7) In applying section 2103(e)(3)(B) in the case of a 
     pregnant woman provided coverage under this section, the 
     limitation on total annual aggregate cost-sharing shall be 
     applied to such pregnant woman.
       ``(8) The reference in section 2107(e)(1)(D) to section 
     1920A (relating to presumptive eligibility for children) is 
     deemed a reference to section 1920 (relating to presumptive 
     eligibility for pregnant women).
       ``(d) Automatic Enrollment for Children Born to Women 
     Receiving Pregnancy-Related Assistance.--If a child is born 
     to a targeted low-income pregnant woman who was receiving 
     pregnancy-related assistance under this section on the date 
     of the child's birth, the child shall be deemed to have 
     applied for child health assistance under the State child 
     health plan and to have been found eligible for such 
     assistance under such plan or to have applied for medical 
     assistance under title XIX and to have been found eligible 
     for such assistance under such title, as appropriate, on the 
     date of such birth and to remain eligible for such assistance 
     until the child attains 1 year of age. During the period in 
     which a child is deemed under the preceding sentence to be 
     eligible for child health or medical assistance, the child 
     health or medical assistance eligibility identification 
     number of the mother shall also serve as the identification 
     number of the child, and all claims shall be submitted and 
     paid under such number (unless the State issues a separate 
     identification number for the child before such period 
     expires).''.
       (2) Additional allotments for providing coverage of 
     pregnant women.--
       (A) In general.--Section 2104 of the Social Security Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 1397dd) is amended by inserting after subsection 
     (c) the following new subsection:
       ``(d) Additional Allotments for Providing Coverage of 
     Pregnant Women.--
       ``(1) Appropriation; total allotment.--For the purpose of 
     providing additional allotments to States under this title, 
     there is appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not 
     otherwise appropriated, for each of fiscal years 2004 through 
     2007, $200,000,000.
       ``(2) State and territorial allotments.--In addition to the 
     allotments provided under subsections (b) and (c), subject to 
     paragraphs (3) and (4), of the amount available for the 
     additional allotments under paragraph (1) for a fiscal year, 
     the Secretary shall allot to each State with a State child 
     health plan approved under this title--
       ``(A) in the case of such a State other than a commonwealth 
     or territory described in subparagraph (B), the same 
     proportion as the proportion of the State's allotment under 
     subsection (b) (determined without regard to subsection (f)) 
     to the total amount of the allotments under subsection (b) 
     for such States eligible for an allotment under this 
     paragraph for such fiscal year; and
       ``(B) in the case of a commonwealth or territory described 
     in subsection (c)(3), the same proportion as the proportion 
     of the commonwealth's or territory's allotment under 
     subsection (c) (determined without regard to subsection (f)) 
     to the total amount of the allotments under subsection (c) 
     for commonwealths and territories eligible for an allotment 
     under this paragraph for such fiscal year.
       ``(3) Use of additional allotment.--Additional allotments 
     provided under this subsection are not available for amounts 
     expended before October 1, 2003. Such amounts are available 
     for amounts expended on or after such date for child health 
     assistance for targeted low-income children, as well as for 
     pregnancy-related assistance for targeted low-income pregnant 
     women.
       ``(4) No payments unless election to expand coverage of 
     pregnant women.--No payments may be made to a State under 
     this title from an allotment provided under this subsection 
     unless the State provides pregnancy-related assistance for 
     targeted low-income pregnant women under this title, or 
     provides medical assistance for pregnant women under title 
     XIX, whose family income exceeds the effective income level 
     applicable under subsection (a)(10)(A)(i)(III) or (l)(2)(A) 
     of section 1902 to a family of the size involved as of 
     January 1, 2003.''.
       (B) Conforming amendments.--Section 2104 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397dd) is amended--
       (i) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by inserting ``subject to subsection (d),'' after 
     ``under this section,'';
       (ii) in subsection (b)(1), by inserting ``and subsection 
     (d)'' after ``Subject to paragraph (4)''; and
       (iii) in subsection (c)(1), by inserting ``subject to 
     subsection (d),'' after ``for a fiscal year,''.
       (3) Additional conforming amendments.--
       (A) No cost-sharing for pregnancy-related benefits.--
     Section 2103(e)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1397cc(e)(2)) is amended--

[[Page S12614]]

       (i) in the heading, by inserting ``or pregnancy-related 
     services'' after ``preventive services''; and
       (ii) by inserting before the period at the end the 
     following: ``or for pregnancy-related services''.
       (B) No waiting period.--Section 2102(b)(1)(B) (42 U.S.C. 
     1397bb(b)(1)(B)) is amended--
       (i) in clause (i), by striking ``, and'' at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (ii) in clause (ii), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(iii) may not apply a waiting period (including a waiting 
     period to carry out paragraph (3)(C)) in the case of a 
     targeted low-income pregnant woman.''.
       (c) Authority for States that Provide Medicaid or SCHIP 
     Coverage for Pregnant Women with Income Above 185 Percent of 
     the Poverty Line to Use Portion of SCHIP Funds for Medicaid 
     Expenditures.--Section 2105(g) of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1397ee(g)), as added by section 1(b) of Public Law 
     108-74, is amended--
       (1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``and Certain 
     Pregnancy Coverage Expansion States'' after ``Qualifying 
     States'';
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(4) Special authority for certain pregnancy coverage 
     expansion states.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of a State that, as of the 
     date of enactment of the Prevent Prematurity and Improve 
     Child Health Act of 2003, has an income eligibility standard 
     under title XIX or this title (under section 1902(a)(10)(A) 
     or under a statewide waiver in effect under section 1115 with 
     respect to title XIX or this title) that is at least 185 
     percent of the poverty line with respect to pregnant women, 
     the State may elect to use not more than 20 percent of any 
     allotment under section 2104 for any fiscal year (insofar as 
     it is available under subsections (e) and (g) of such 
     section) for payments under title XIX in accordance with 
     subparagraph (B), instead of for expenditures under this 
     title.
       ``(B) Payments to states.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of a State described in 
     subparagraph (A) that has elected the option described in 
     that subparagraph, subject to the availability of funds under 
     such subparagraph and, if applicable, paragraph (1)(A), with 
     respect to the State, the Secretary shall pay the State an 
     amount each quarter equal to the additional amount that would 
     have been paid to the State under title XIX with respect to 
     expenditures described in clause (ii) if the enhanced FMAP 
     (as determined under subsection (b)) had been substituted for 
     the Federal medical assistance percentage (as defined in 
     section 1905(b)).
       ``(ii) Expenditures described.--For purposes of this 
     subparagraph, the expenditures described in this clause are 
     expenditures, made after the date of the enactment of this 
     paragraph and during the period in which funds are available 
     to the State for use under subparagraph (A), for medical 
     assistance under title XIX for pregnant women whose family 
     income is at least 185 percent of the poverty line.
       ``(iii) No impact on determination of budget neutrality for 
     waivers.--In the case of a State described in subparagraph 
     (A) that uses amounts paid under this paragraph for 
     expenditures described in clause (ii) that are incurred under 
     a waiver approved for the State, any budget neutrality 
     determinations with respect to such waiver shall be 
     determined without regard to such amounts paid.''; and
       (3) in paragraph (3), by striking ``and (2)'' and inserting 
     ``(2), and (4)''.
       (d) Other Amendments to Medicaid.--
       (1) Eligibility of a newborn.--Section 1902(e)(4) of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(e)(4)) is amended in the 
     first sentence by striking ``so long as the child is a member 
     of the woman's household and the woman remains (or would 
     remain if pregnant) eligible for such assistance''.
       (2) Application of qualified entities to presumptive 
     eligibility for pregnant women under medicaid.--Section 
     1920(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-1(b)) is 
     amended by adding after paragraph (2) the following flush 
     sentence:
     ``The term `qualified provider' includes a qualified entity 
     as defined in section 1920A(b)(3).''.
       (e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     apply to items and services furnished on or after October 1, 
     2003, without regard to whether regulations implementing such 
     amendments have been promulgated.

     SEC. 3. OPTIONAL COVERAGE OF LEGAL IMMIGRANTS UNDER THE 
                   MEDICAID PROGRAM AND SCHIP.

       (a) Medicaid Program.--Section 1903(v) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396b(v)) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and 
     inserting ``paragraphs (2) and (4)''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(4)(A) A State may elect (in a plan amendment under this 
     title) to provide medical assistance under this title for 
     aliens who are lawfully residing in the United States 
     (including battered aliens described in section 431(c) of the 
     Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation 
     Act of 1996) and who are otherwise eligible for such 
     assistance, within any of the following eligibility 
     categories:
       ``(i) Pregnant women.--Women during pregnancy (and during 
     the 60-day period beginning on the last day of the 
     pregnancy).
       ``(ii) Children.--Children (as defined under such plan), 
     including optional targeted low-income children described in 
     section 1905(u)(2)(B).
       ``(B)(i) In the case of a State that has elected to provide 
     medical assistance to a category of aliens under subparagraph 
     (A), no debt shall accrue under an affidavit of support 
     against any sponsor of such an alien on the basis of 
     provision of assistance to such category and the cost of such 
     assistance shall not be considered as an unreimbursed cost.
       ``(ii) The provisions of sections 401(a), 402(b), 403, and 
     421 of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity 
     Reconciliation Act of 1996 shall not apply to a State that 
     makes an election under subparagraph (A).''.
       (b) Title XXI.--Section 2107(e)(1) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1397gg(e)(1)) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following new subparagraph:
       ``(E) Section 1903(v)(4) (relating to optional coverage of 
     permanent resident alien pregnant women and children), but 
     only with respect to an eligibility category under this 
     title, if the same eligibility category has been elected 
     under such section for purposes of title XIX.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     take effect on October 1, 2003, and apply to medical 
     assistance and child health assistance furnished on or after 
     such date.

     SEC. 4. PROMOTING CESSATION OF TOBACCO USE UNDER THE MEDICAID 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Dropping Exception From Medicaid Prescription Drug 
     Coverage for Tobacco Cessation Medications.--Section 
     1927(d)(2) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396r-
     8(d)(2)) is amended--
       (1) by striking subparagraph (E);
       (2) by redesignating subparagraphs (F) through (J) as 
     subparagraphs (E) through (I), respectively; and
       (3) in subparagraph (F) (as redesignated by paragraph (2)), 
     by inserting before the period at the end the following: ``, 
     except agents approved by the Food and Drug Administration 
     for purposes of promoting, and when used to promote, tobacco 
     cessation''.
       (b) Requiring Coverage of Tobacco Cessation Counseling 
     Services for Pregnant Women.--Section 1905 of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d(a)(4)) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(4)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' before ``(C)''; and
       (C) by inserting before the semicolon at the end the 
     following new subparagraph: ``; and (D) counseling for 
     cessation of tobacco use (as defined in subsection (x)) for 
     pregnant women''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(x)(1) For purposes of this title, the term `counseling 
     for cessation of tobacco use' means therapy and counseling 
     for cessation of tobacco use for pregnant women who use 
     tobacco products or who are being treated for tobacco use 
     that is furnished--
       ``(A) by or under the supervision of a physician; or
       ``(B) by any other health care professional who--
       ``(i) is legally authorized to furnish such services under 
     State law (or the State regulatory mechanism provided by 
     State law) of the State in which the services are furnished; 
     and
       ``(ii) is authorized to receive payment for other services 
     under this title or is designated by the Secretary for this 
     purpose.
       ``(2) Subject to paragraph (3), such term is limited to--
       ``(A) therapy and counseling services recommended in 
     `Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: A Clinical Practice 
     Guideline', published by the Public Health Service in June 
     2000, or any subsequent modification of such Guideline; and
       ``(B) such other therapy and counseling services that the 
     Secretary recognizes to be effective.
       ``(3) Such term shall not include coverage for drugs or 
     biologicals that are not otherwise covered under this 
     title.''.
       (c) Removal of Cost-Sharing for Tobacco Cessation 
     Counseling Services for Pregnant Women.--Section 1916 of the 
     Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396o) is amended in each of 
     subsections (a)(2)(B) and (b)(2)(B) by inserting ``, and 
     counseling for cessation of tobacco use (as defined in 
     section 1905(x))'' after ``complicate the pregnancy''.
       (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to services furnished on or after the date that 
     is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. PROMOTING CESSATION OF TOBACCO USE UNDER THE MATERNAL 
                   AND CHILD HEALTH SERVICES BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.

       (a) Quality Maternal and Child Health Services Includes 
     Tobacco Cessation Counseling and Medications.--
       (1) In general.--Section 501 of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 701) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subsection:
       ``(c) For purposes of this title, counseling for cessation 
     of tobacco use (as defined in section 1905(x)), drugs and 
     biologicals used to promote smoking cessation, and the 
     inclusion of antitobacco messages in health promotion 
     counseling shall be considered to be part of quality maternal 
     and child health services.''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall take effect on the date that is 1 year after the date 
     of enactment of this Act.

[[Page S12615]]

       (b) Evaluation of National Core Performance Measures.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Health Resources 
     and Services Administration shall assess the current national 
     core performance measures and national core outcome measures 
     utilized under the Maternal and Child Health Block Grant 
     under title V of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 701 et 
     seq.) for purposes of expanding such measures to include some 
     of the known causes of low birthweight and prematurity, 
     including the percentage of infants born to pregnant women 
     who smoked during pregnancy.
       (2) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Health 
     Resources and Services Administration shall submit to the 
     appropriate committees of Congress a report concerning the 
     results of the evaluation conducted under paragraph (1).

     SEC. 6. STATE OPTION TO PROVIDE FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES AND 
                   SUPPLIES TO INDIVIDUALS WITH INCOMES THAT DO 
                   NOT EXCEED A STATE'S INCOME ELIGIBILITY LEVEL 
                   FOR MEDICAL ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--Title XIX of the Social Security Act (42 
     U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating section 1935 as section 1936; and
       (2) by inserting after section 1934 the following new 
     section:


    ``state option to provide family planning services and supplies

       ``Sec. 1935. (a) In General.--Subject to subsections (b) 
     and (c), a State may elect (through a State plan amendment) 
     to make medical assistance described in section 1905(a)(4)(C) 
     available to any individual whose family income does not 
     exceed the greater of--
       ``(1) 185 percent of the income official poverty line (as 
     defined by the Office of Management and Budget, and revised 
     annually in accordance with section 673(2) of the Omnibus 
     Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981) applicable to a family of 
     the size involved; or
       ``(2) the eligibility income level (expressed as a 
     percentage of such poverty line) that has been specified 
     under a waiver authorized by the Secretary or under section 
     1902(r)(2)), as of October 1, 2003, for an individual to be 
     eligible for medical assistance under the State plan.
       ``(b) Comparability.--Medical assistance described in 
     section 1905(a)(4)(C) that is made available under a State 
     plan amendment under subsection (a) shall--
       ``(1) not be less in amount, duration, or scope than the 
     medical assistance described in that section that is made 
     available to any other individual under the State plan; and
       ``(2) be provided in accordance with the restrictions on 
     deductions, cost sharing, or similar charges imposed under 
     section 1916(a)(2)(D).
       ``(c) Option To Extend Coverage During a Post-Eligibility 
     Period.--
       ``(1) Initial period.--A State plan amendment made under 
     subsection (a) may provide that any individual who was 
     receiving medical assistance described in section 
     1905(a)(4)(C) as a result of such amendment, and who becomes 
     ineligible for such assistance because of hours of, or income 
     from, employment, may remain eligible for such medical 
     assistance through the end of the 6-month period that begins 
     on the first day the individual becomes so ineligible.
       ``(2) Additional extension.--A State plan amendment made 
     under subsection (a) may provide that any individual who has 
     received medical assistance described in section 
     1905(a)(4)(C) during the entire 6-month period described in 
     paragraph (1) may be extended coverage for such assistance 
     for a succeeding 6-month period.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     apply to medical assistance provided on and after October 1, 
     2003.

     SEC. 7. STATE OPTION TO EXTEND THE POSTPARTUM PERIOD FOR 
                   PROVISION OF FAMILY PLANNING SERVICES AND 
                   SUPPLIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 1902(e)(5) of the Social Security 
     Act (42 U.S.C. 1396a(e)(5)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``eligible under the plan, as though'' and 
     inserting ``eligible under the plan--
       ``(A) as though'';
       (2) by striking the period and inserting ``; and''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) for medical assistance described in section 
     1905(a)(4)(C) for so long as the family income of such woman 
     does not exceed the maximum income level established by the 
     State for the woman to be eligible for medical assistance 
     under the State plan (as a result of pregnancy or 
     otherwise).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     apply to medical assistance provided on and after October 1, 
     2003.

     SEC. 8. STATE OPTION TO PROVIDE WRAP-AROUND SCHIP COVERAGE TO 
                   CHILDREN WHO HAVE OTHER HEALTH COVERAGE.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) SCHIP.--
       (A) State option to provide wrap-around coverage.--Section 
     2110(b) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397jj(b)) is 
     amended--
       (i) in paragraph (1)(C), by inserting ``, subject to 
     paragraph (5),'' after ``under title XIX or''; and
       (ii) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) State option to provide wrap-around coverage.--A 
     State may waive the requirement of paragraph (1)(C) that a 
     targeted low-income child may not be covered under a group 
     health plan or under health insurance coverage, if the State 
     satisfies the conditions described in subsection (c)(8). The 
     State may waive such requirement in order to provide--
       ``(A) services for a child with special health care needs; 
     or
       ``(B) all services.
     In waiving such requirement, a State may limit the 
     application of the waiver to children whose family income 
     does not exceed a level specified by the State, so long as 
     the level so specified does not exceed the maximum income 
     level otherwise established for other children under the 
     State child health plan .''.
       (B) Conditions described.--Section 2105(c) of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1397ee(c)) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(8) Conditions for provision of wrap-around coverage.--
     For purposes of section 2110(b)(5), the conditions described 
     in this paragraph are the following:
       ``(A) Income eligibility.--The State child health plan 
     (whether implemented under title XIX or this XXI)--
       ``(i) has the highest income eligibility standard permitted 
     under this title as of January 1, 2003;
       ``(ii) subject to subparagraph (B), does not limit the 
     acceptance of applications for children; and
       ``(iii) provides benefits to all children in the State who 
     apply for and meet eligibility standards.
       ``(B) No waiting list imposed.--With respect to children 
     whose family income is at or below 200 percent of the poverty 
     line, the State does not impose any numerical limitation, 
     waiting list, or similar limitation on the eligibility of 
     such children for child health assistance under such State 
     plan.
       ``(C) No more favorable treatment.--The State child health 
     plan may not provide more favorable coverage of dental 
     services to the children covered under section 2110(b)(5) 
     than to children otherwise covered under this title.''.
       (C) State option to waive waiting period.--Section 
     2102(b)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1397bb(b)(1)(B)), as amended by section 2(b)(3)(B), is 
     amended--
       (i) in clause (ii), by striking ``, and'' at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon;
       (ii) in clause (iii), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (iii) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(iv) at State option, may not apply a waiting period in 
     the case of a child described in section 2110(b)(5), if the 
     State satisfies the requirements of section 2105(c)(8).''.
       (2) Application of enhanced match under medicaid.--Section 
     1905 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396d), as amended 
     by section 2(a)(2), is amended--
       (A) in subsection (b), in the fourth sentence, by striking 
     ``or (u)(4)'' and inserting ``(u)(4), or (u)(5)''; and
       (B) in subsection (u)--
       (i) by redesignating paragraph (5) as paragraph (6); and
       (ii) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
       ``(5) For purposes of subsection (b), the expenditures 
     described in this paragraph are expenditures for items and 
     services for children described in section 2110(b)(5), but 
     only in the case of a State that satisfies the requirements 
     of section 2105(c)(8).''.
       (3) Application of secondary payor provisions.--Section 
     2107(e)(1) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1397gg(e)(1)), as amended by section 3(b), is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:
       ``(F) Section 1902(a)(25) (relating to coordination of 
     benefits and secondary payor provisions) with respect to 
     children covered under a waiver described in section 
     2110(b)(5).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall take effect on January 1, 2003, and shall apply to 
     child health assistance and medical assistance provided on or 
     after that date.

  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce with my 
colleagues Senator Lincoln and Senator Bingaman, the Prevent Pre-
maturity and Improve Child Health Act.
  Pre-maturity has been escalating steadily and alarmingly over the 
past two decades. Between 1981 and 2001, the rate of premature births 
rose from 9.4 percent to 11.9 percent, an increase of more than 27 
percent. In 2001, more than 476,000 babies were born prematurely.
  Pre-maturity is the leading cause of infant death in the first month 
of life. Babies born too early are more likely than full-term infants 
to face serious multiple health problems following delivery. the health 
problems facing many of these children include cerebral palsy, mental 
retardation, chronic lung disease, and vision and hearing loss. If we 
are able to reduce the number of premature births we will be able to 
improve the health of hundreds of thousands of infants born each year.
  The goal of the ``Prevent Pre-maturity and Improve Child Health Act'' 
is

[[Page S12616]]

to give States increased flexibility and the Federal resources needed 
to improve access to prenatal care for low-income pregnant women and 
their children.
  Among other things, the bill allows States the option of covering 
legal immigrant pregnant women under Medicaid. It also promotes new 
programs and more coverage for tobacco cessation in Medicaid, and 
Maternal Child Health block grant programs, and allows States the 
option of providing wrap-around SCHIP coverage for special needs 
children who have another source of health insurance.
  Our bill has the potential to make a real difference in many lives. I 
am pleased that we are able to introduce this bill in conjunction with 
the March of Dimes kick off of their new campaign on pre-maturity 
awareness and hope that our colleagues will consider joining us in this 
effort.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HATCH (for himself, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Grassley, Mr. 
        Graham of South Carolina, Mr. Chambliss, and Mr. Campbell):
  S. 1735. A bill to increase and enhance law enforcement resources 
committed to investigation and prosecution of violent gangs, to deter 
and punish violent gang crime, to protect law abiding citizens and 
communities from violent criminals, to revise and enhance criminal 
penalties for violent crimes, to reform and facilitate prosecution of 
juvenile gang members who commit violent crimes, to expand and improve 
gang prevention programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce with my 
colleague, Senator Feinstein, a comprehensive bipartisan bill to 
increase gang prosecution and prevention efforts.
  This legislation, the Gang Prevention and Effective Deterrence Act of 
2003, authorizes approximately $650 million over the next 5 years to 
support law enforcement and prevention efforts. Of the $650 million, 
$450 million would be used to support Federal, State and local law 
enforcement efforts against violent gangs, and $200 million would be 
used for intervention and prevention programs for at-risk youth. The 
bill also increases funding for the Federal prosecutors and FBI agents 
needed to conduct coordinated enforcement efforts against violent 
gangs.
  Additionally, this bill will create new criminal gang prosecution 
offenses, enhance existing gang and violent crime penalties to deter 
and punish illegal street gangs, enact violent crime reforms needed to 
prosecute effectively gang members, and implement a limited reform of 
the juvenile justice system to facilitate Federal prosecution of 16 and 
17-year-old gang members who commit serious violent felonies.
  I want to take a moment here and commend my dear friend Senator 
Feinstein for her long-time commitment to this issue. She has been a 
leader in California and in the Senate in the war against gangs and 
gang violence. She and I have worked together for many years on this 
important issue, and I look forward to our joint effort to enact 
meaningful legislation.
  The problem of gang violence in America is not a new one, nor is it a 
problem that is limited to major urban areas. Once thought to be only a 
problem in our Nation's largest cities, gangs have invaded smaller 
communities.
  The problem of gang violence is of great concern to the citizens of 
my State. According to the Salt Lake Area Gang Project, a multi-
jurisdictional task force created in 1989 to fight gang crime in the 
Salt Lake area, there are at least 250 identified gangs in our region 
with over 3,500 members. What is perhaps most troubling, the juvenile 
gang members in Utah account for over one-third of the total gang 
membership.
  Gangs now resemble organized crime syndicates who readily engage in 
gun violence, illegal gun trafficking, illegal drug trafficking and 
other serious crimes. All too often we read in the headlines about 
gruesome and tragic stories of rival gang members gunned down, innocent 
bystanders--adults, teenagers and children--caught in the crossfire of 
gangland shootings, and family members crying out in grief as they lose 
loved ones to the gang wars plaguing our communities.
  Recent studies confirmed that gang violence is an increasing problem 
in all of our communities. Based on the latest available National Youth 
Gang Survey, it is now estimated that there are more than 25,000 gangs, 
and over 750,000 gang members who are active in more than 3,000 
jurisdictions across the United States. The most current reports 
indicate that in 2002 alone, after five years of decline, gang 
membership has spiked nationwide.
  While we are all committed to fighting the global war on terrorism, 
we must redouble our efforts to ensure that we devote sufficient 
resources to combating this important national problem--the rise in 
gangs and gang violence in America. I have been--and remain--committed 
to supporting Federal, State and local task forces as a model for 
effective gang enforcement strategies. Working together, these task 
forces have demonstrated that they can make a difference in our 
communities.
  In Salt Lake City, the Metro Gang Multi-Jurisdiction Task Force has 
for years demonstrated its critical role in fighting gang violence in 
Salt Lake City. We must act in a bipartisan fashion to ensure that 
adequate resources are available to all of our communities to expand 
and fund these critical task force operations to fight gang violence.
  I also am mindful of the fact that to be successful in reducing gang 
violence, we must address not only effective law enforcement 
strategies, but we must also take steps to protect our youth--so that 
the next generation does not all into the abyss of gang life, which so 
often includes gun violence, drug trafficking, and other serious 
crimes. The young people of our cities need to be steered away from 
gang involvement. We need to ensure that there are sufficient tools to 
intervene in the lives of these troubled youth. Federal involvement is 
crucial to control gang violence and to prevent new gang members from 
replacing old gang members.
  We must take a proactive approach and meet this problem head on if we 
wish to defeat it. If we really want to reduce gang violence, we must 
ensure that law enforcement has adequate resources and legal tools and 
that our communities have the ability to implement proven intervention 
and prevention strategies, so that gang members who are removed from 
the community are not simply replaced by the next generation of new 
gang members.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to join with me and Senator Feinstein 
in promptly passing this important legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that an analysis of the bill be printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the analysis was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


                                overview

       The Gang Prevention and Effective Deterrence Act of 2003 is 
     a comprehensive bill to increase gang prosecution and 
     prevention efforts. The bill authorizes approximately $650 
     million over the next 5 years, $450 million of which would be 
     used to support Federal, State and local law enforcement 
     efforts against violent gangs, and $200 million of which 
     would be used for intervention and prevention programs for 
     at-risk youth. In support of this effort, the bill increases 
     funding for federal prosecutors and FBI agents to increase 
     coordinated enforcement efforts against violent gangs.
       The Act also creates new criminal gang prosecution 
     offenses, enhances existing gang and violent crime penalties 
     to deter and punish illegal street gangs, proposes violent 
     crime reforms needed to prosecute effectively gang members, 
     and proposes a limited reform of the juvenile justice system 
     to facilitate federal prosecution of 16 and 17 year old gang 
     members who commit serious acts of violence.


              title i--criminal street gang abatement act

       Sec. 101. Solicitation or Recruitment of Persons in 
     Criminal Street Gang Activity. This section creates a new 
     criminal offense to prohibit recruitment of a person in a 
     criminal street gang. The penalty for such a violation is a 
     maximum of 10 years imprisonment, or if the violation 
     involves the recruitment of a minor, a mandatory minimum 
     penalty of not less than 3 years and a maximum of 10 years 
     imprisonment.
       Sec. 102. Criminal Street Gangs. This section revises 
     existing section 521 of title 18, United States Code, to 
     prohibit illegal participation in a criminal street gang. A 
     ``criminal street gang'' is defined to mean a formal or 
     informal group, club, organization or association of 3 or 
     more persons who act in concert to commit gang crimes. The 
     term ``gang crime'' is defined to include violent

[[Page S12617]]

     and other serious State and Federal felony crimes. Subsection 
     (b) prohibits participation in a criminal street gang either 
     by (1) committing, conspiring or attempting to commit, 2 or 
     more predicate gang crimes related to the gang activity; or 
     (2) to employ, use or command, counsel persuade, induce, 
     entice or coerce another individual to commit a gang crime. 
     The maximum penalties for a violation of subsection (b)(1) is 
     30 years imprisonment and for subsection (b)(2) is 20 years 
     imprisonment, or a mandatory minimum of 10 years imprisonment 
     if the violation of subsection (b)(2) involves a minor. 
     Additional penalties, including the death penalty, are 
     authorized for gang crimes depending on whether the violation 
     results in the taking of a life, attempted murder, the 
     violator is an organizer, leader, supervisor, or manager, or 
     the violator is a repeat offender.
       Sec. 103. Violent Crimes in Furtherance or in Aid of 
     Criminal Street Gangs. This section creates a new criminal 
     offense for murder, kidnapping, sexual assaults, maiming, 
     assaults with a dangerous weapon, or assaults resulting in 
     serious bodily injury, which are committed in furtherance or 
     in aid of a criminal street gang. The penalties for such 
     violations range from a maximum of 10 years to death 
     depending on the nature of the offense.
       Sec. 104. Interstate and Foreign Travel or Transportation 
     in Aid of Criminal Street Gangs. This section amends existing 
     section 1952 of title 18, United States Code, to increase 
     penalties and expand the prohibition to include efforts to 
     obstruct justice, intimidate or retaliate against witnesses, 
     jurors, informants or victims.
       Sec. 105. Amendments Relating to Violent Crime in Areas of 
     Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction. This section amends criminal 
     statutes relating to assault (section 113(a)(3)), conspiracy 
     (section 371), manslaughter (section 1112(b), offenses 
     committed within Indian country (section 1153(a)), 
     racketeering (section 1961(l)), carjacking (section 2119), 
     illegal gun transfers to drug traffickers or violent 
     criminals (section 924(h)), special sentencing provisions 
     (section 3582(d)), and application of the two strikes 
     provision in Indian country (section 3559(e)).
       Sec. 106. Increased Penalties for Use of Interstate 
     Commerce Facilities in the Commission of Murder-For-Hire and 
     Other Felony Crimes of Violence. This section amends existing 
     section 1958 of title 18, United States Code, to increase 
     penalties for hiring an individual to kill another person and 
     prohibits a fine in lieu of a sentence for conduct resulting 
     in death.
       Sec. 107. Increased Penalties for Violent Crimes in Aid of 
     Racketeering Activity. This section amends existing section 
     1959(a) of title 18, United States Code, to increase 
     penalties and expand the prohibition to include sexual 
     assault.
       Sec. 108. Murder and Other Violent Crimes Committed During 
     and In Relation to a Drug Trafficking Crime. This section 
     creates a new criminal offense for murder, kidnapping, sexual 
     assaults, maiming, assaults with a dangerous weapon, or 
     assaults resulting in serious bodily injury, which are 
     committed during and in relation to drug trafficking crimes. 
     The penalties for such violations range from a maximum of 10 
     years to death depending on the nature of the offense.
       Sec. 109. Sentencing Guidelines for Gang Crimes, Including 
     an Increase in Offense Level for Participation in Crime as a 
     Gang Member. This section directs the United States 
     Sentencing Commission to amend the Federal Sentencing 
     Guidelines to reflect the newly created offenses of: (1) 
     solicitation or recruitment or persons in criminal street 
     gang activity; (2) criminal street gangs; and (3) violent 
     crimes in furtherance of criminal street gangs to reflect the 
     seriousness of the offenses.
       Sec. 110. Designation of and Assistance for ``High 
     Intensity'' Interstate Gang Activity Areas. This section 
     requires the Attorney General, after consultation with 
     the Governors of appropriate States, to designate certain 
     locations as high intensity interstate gang activity areas 
     and provides assistance in the form of criminal street 
     gang enforcement teams made up of local, State and Federal 
     law enforcement authorities to investigate and prosecute 
     criminal street gangs in each high intensity interstate 
     gang activity area. Subsection (c) authorizes funding of 
     $100 million for each fiscal year 2004 through 2008. Sixty 
     percent, or $60 million, will be used to support the 
     criminal gang enforcement teams and 40 percent, or $40 
     million, will be used to make grants available for 
     community-based programs to provide for crime prevention 
     and intervention services for gang members and at-risk 
     youth in areas designated as high intensity interstate 
     gang activity areas.
       Sec. 111. Enhancement of Project Safe Neighborhoods 
     Initiative to Improve Enforcement of Criminal Laws Against 
     Violent Gangs. Subsection (a) expands the Project Safe 
     Neighborhood program to require United States Attorneys to 
     identify and prosecute significant gangs within their 
     district; coordinate such prosecutions among all local, 
     State, and Federal law enforcement; and coordinate criminal 
     street gang enforcement teams in designated high intensity 
     interstate gang activity areas. Subsection (b) authorizes the 
     hiring of 94 additional Assistant United States Attorneys and 
     funding of $7.5 million for each fiscal year 2004 to 2008 to 
     carry out the provisions of this section.
       Sec. 112. Additional Resources Needed by the Federal Bureau 
     of Investigation to Investigate and prosecute Violent 
     Criminal Street Gangs. This section requires the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation to increase funding for the Safe 
     Streets Program and to support the criminal street gang 
     enforcement teams in designated high intensity interstate 
     gang activity areas. Subsection (b) authorizes $5 million for 
     each fiscal year 2004 to 2008 to expand the FBI's Safe 
     Streets Program.
       Sec. 113. Grants to States and Local Prosecutors to Combat 
     Violent Crime and to Protect Witnesses and Victims of Crime. 
     This section authorizes $20 million for each of the fiscal 
     years 2004 to 2008 to allow for the hiring of additional 
     State and local prosecutors, the funding of gang prevention 
     and community prosecution programs, the purchasing of 
     technological equipment to increase the accurate 
     identification and prosecution of violent offenders, and the 
     creation and expansion of witness protection programs to 
     prevent witness intimidation and retaliation.


  Title II--violent crime reforms needed to deter and prevent illegal 
                               gang crime

       Sec. 201. Multiple Interstate Murder. This section creates 
     a new criminal offense for traveling in or causing another to 
     travel in interstate or foreign commerce or to use any 
     facility in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent 
     that 2 or more murders be committed in violation of the laws 
     of any State or the United States. The penalties for such 
     violations range from a maximum of 20 years to death 
     depending on the nature of the offense.
       Sec. 202. Expansion of Rebuttable Presumption Against 
     Release of Persons Charged with Firearms. This section 
     applies the rebuttable presumption in pre-trial release 
     detention hearings to cases in which a defendant is charged 
     with firearms offenses after having previously been convicted 
     of a prior crime of violence or a serious drug offense.
       Sec. 203. Venue in Capital Cases. This section amends 
     section 3235 of title 18 to clarify venue in capital cases 
     where murder, or related conduct, occurred. The existing 
     venue provision restricts venue in criminal cases where 
     murder occurs in relation to racketeering, drug conspiracy, 
     or criminal street gang.
       Sec. 204. Statute of Limitation for Violent Crime. This 
     section extends the statute of limitations for violent crime 
     cases from 5 years to 10 years after the offense occurred or 
     the continuing offense was completed, and from 5 years to 8 
     years after the date on which the violation was first 
     discovered.
       Sec. 205. Predicate Crimes for Authorization of 
     Interception of Wire, Oral and Electronic Communications. 
     This section adds the new criminal offenses to the 
     surveillance predicates listed in section 2516 of title 18, 
     United States Code.
       Sec. 206. Clarification of Crime of Violence. This section 
     amends the definition of a crime of violence in response to 
     recent restrictive court decisions excluding violent acts 
     committed with a reckless or negligent mens rea.
       Sec. 207. Clarification to Hearsay Exception for Forfeiture 
     by Wrongdoing. This section codifies the holding in United 
     States v. Cherry, 217 F.3d 811 (10th Cir. 2000), which 
     permits admission of statements of a murdered witness to be 
     introduced against the defendant who caused a witness' 
     unavailability and the members of the conspiracy if such 
     actions were foreseeable to the other members of the 
     conspiracy.
       Sec. 208. Clarification of Venue for Retaliation Against a 
     Witness. This section clarifies the venue statute for crimes 
     involving the retaliation against a witness to allow for 
     prosecution in the district where the official proceeding 
     which gave rise to the retaliation occurred or where the act 
     of retaliation occurred.
       Sec. 209. Amendment of Sentencing Guidelines Relating to 
     Certain Gang and Violent Crimes. This section directs the 
     United States Sentencing Commission to review and, if 
     appropriate, amend its guidelines and policy statements in 
     order to implement new or revised criminal offenses created 
     by this legislation.
       Sec. 210. Increased Penalties for Criminal Use of Firearms 
     in Crimes of Violence and Drug Trafficking. This section 
     increases the penalty for the use or discharge of a firearm 
     in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime. The 
     penalties are increased further if the firearm injures or 
     causes the death of another.


         TITLE III--JUVENILE CRIME REFORM FOR VIOLENT OFFENDERS

       Sec. 301. Treatment of Federal Juvenile Offenders. This 
     section authorizes the United States Attorney to charge in 
     federal court a juvenile who is 16 years or older and 
     committed a serious violent felony, as defined in section 
     3559(c)(2) or (c)(3). Technical changes are made to existing 
     statute, section 5032 of title 18, United States Code, to 
     conform with limited authorization for United States Attorney 
     filings
       Sec. 302. Notification After Arrest. This section modifies 
     existing section 5033 of title 18 to ensure notification of 
     United States Attorney after arrest of juvenile offender.
       Sec. 303. Release and Detention Prior to Disposition. This 
     section makes technical changes to existing statue, 5034 of 
     title 18, and makes conforming changes to ensure 
     consideration of release conditions for juveniles charged as 
     adults.
       Sec. 304. Speedy Trial. This section modifies existing 
     speedy trial statute to require

[[Page S12618]]

     trial within 70 days from detention of juvenile who is 
     charted as an adult and applies existing exclusions from 
     section 3161(h) of title 18.
       Sec. 305. Use of Juvenile Records. This section ensures 
     that juvenile records relating to a case in which a juvenile 
     is charged as an adult are made available in the same manner 
     as adult cases.
       Sec. 306. Directive to United States Sentencing Commission. 
     This section directs the Sentencing Commission to develop new 
     guidelines applicable to juvenile offenders who are charged 
     as adults.

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Chairman Hatch in 
introducing the Gang Prevention and Effective Deterrence Act of 2003, a 
bill to give law enforcement additional tools to fight the scourge of 
gang violence and to fund prevention programs to stop the cycle of gang 
violence.
  I thank and commend my good friend and colleague, Chairman Hatch, for 
his hard work in helping to develop this legislation. Since 1996, he 
and I have worked together to address the problem of gang violence in 
this country.
  We have now introduced legislation in each of the last four 
Congresses--the 104th, 105th, 106th, and 107th. None of that 
legislation became law. But we have not given up.
  The legislation we are introducing today addresses the many aspects 
of gang violence by focusing on new criminal offenses and increased 
penalties for individuals who engage in gang violence. Specifically, 
this legislation targets gang members who participate in criminal 
street gang by committing gang crimes like murder, sexual assault, 
robbery, and drug offenses to name a few, or by employing others to do 
so; recruit and use minors in gang crimes; commit violent crimes in 
furtherance of gang or drug trafficking activity; or travel in 
interstate commerce to intimidate and retaliate against witnesses.
  This legislation also makes it easier to prosecute certain 16 and 17-
year-olds as adults if they are engaging in violent gang activity.
  We have also worked to provide for more cooperation between Federal 
and local law enforcement officials, and to make it easier for 
prosecutors to go after gang members who commit serious or violent 
crimes on behalf of their gangs.
  We offer this comprehensive legislation because the problem of gang 
violence continues to get worse. I concur in the sentiments expressed 
by Los Angeles Police Department Chief William Bratton when he stated, 
``There is nothing more insidious than these gangs. They are worse than 
the Mafia. Show me a year in New York where the Mafia indiscriminately 
killed 300 people. You can't.''
  In 2002, there were over 650 homicides in Los Angeles, half of which 
were gang related. This year the Los Angeles Police Department reports 
approximately 400 murders and almost one-half of those murders are the 
result of gang violence.
  The United States Attorney in Los Angeles testified before the 
Judiciary Committee last month about the gang problem in her city. She 
stated that in Los Angeles County alone, conservative estimates put 
street gangs at about 1,000 in number. The number of individual gang 
members in those street gangs is 150,000.
  In addition, there are approximately another 20,000 gang members in 
Orange County, Ventura and San Bernardino Counties.
  I am often struck by how vicious gang crimes can be, and how damaging 
they are to the victims and to the surrounding community.
  Let me give a couple of examples from my own home city of San 
Francisco.
  In 2000, two rival gangs had a shoot out in San Francisco's Mission 
District. An innocent bystander was caught in the crossfire and shot 
through both legs.

  A brave eyewitness gave law enforcement the name of the shooting 
suspect, who was then arrested. The gang then tracked down the witness, 
put a 9 millimeter automatic to his head, and threatened to kill him 
for cooperating with the police.
  And just recently, on September 28, 2003, 7-week-old Glenn Timmy 
Maurice Molex was killed in his home during a drive-by shooting in a 
Bayview district neighborhood in San Francisco. Law enforcement believe 
that gang members may have been involved in the shooting.
  But this problem is not limited to any one city, of course.
  In 1980, there were gangs in 286 jurisdictions. Today, they are in 
over 1,500 jurisdictions.
  In 1980, there were about 2,000 gangs. Today, there are over 26,000 
gangs.
  In 1980, there were about 100,000 gang members. Today, there are more 
than 750,000 gang members.
  I would like to explain how this legislation will help deter and 
punish gang-related crimes, and why Congress should act quickly to pass 
it.
  First, the bill includes tough 10-year sentences for gang 
recruitment. This will serve to punish anyone who recruits a member to 
join--or forces a member to stay in--a criminal street gang with the 
intent to have that person commit a serious violent crime or a drug 
crime.
  Second, if the person who was recruited was a minor, the offender 
will serve a mandatory minimum sentence of 3 years.
  The purpose of this provision is to deter criminal gang recruitment. 
It is also to punish those who use minors to commit their crimes. And 
gangs specifically do go after juveniles because they know that, if the 
child is caught, he or she will probably receive lighter punishment 
than an adult.
  I believe that we need to punish gang recruitment of children very 
severely. This bill would do that.
  This legislation would also make it a crime for three or more people 
who work together to commit predicate gang crimes which are listed in 
the bill. Gang members who commit two or more predicate gang crimes or 
employ another individual to commit a gang crime would be punished 
under this new statute by up to 30 years in prison. If the predicate 
gang crime carries a greater penalty, the maximum would increase. If 
the gang member has previously been convicted of a predicate gang 
crime, that gang member's sentence would also increase.
  And because juveniles are being used to commit these gang crimes, if 
the gang member employs a minor to commit the gang crime, the gang 
member would face a mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years.
  The predicate gang crimes are felony crimes and include murder, 
attempted murder, manslaughter, gambling, kidnapping, robbery, 
extortion, arson, obstruction of justice, tampering with or retaliating 
against a witness, victim or informant, burglary, sexual assault, 
carjacking, or selling or possessing a controlled substance, firearm 
offenses, and illegal transportation of an alien.
  The offenses that are listed as predicate gang crimes are those 
commonly pursued by gangs.
  One study of gangs in various countries found that law enforcement 
reported that 55 percent of gang members were involved in aggravated 
assaults; 33 percent in robberies;
  Fifty-eight percent in burglary and breaking and entering;
  Fifty-two percent in motor vehicle theft; and
  Seventy-two percent in drug sales.
  Numerous gangs illegally launder their illicit drug profits. These 
include Russian and West African criminal gangs as well as street gangs 
such as the Bloods, Crips, Gangster Disciples, and Latin Kings.
  This bill also allows property derived from gang crimes to be 
forfeited.
  Third, the bill creates a new, RICO-like, anti-gang law to help 
prosecutors target the more serious gangs and gang members. In response 
to the problems of mafia-violence, the racketeering statute was created 
to punish violent crimes that are in furtherance of a racketeering 
enterprise. This legislation will do the same for violent crimes that 
are in furtherance of gang activity or drug activity.
  The gang and drug crimes are those which I have described earlier--
murder, carjacking, drug distribution, robbery, firearms violations, 
and sexual assault. These crimes represent the heart of gang activity 
and those who commit them must be met with tough penalties.
  The penalties range from a maximum of 10 years to the death penalty 
if death results from the crime.
  This legislation also expands the Travel Act.
  The Travel Act allows Federal prosecutors to charge certain 
interstate crimes such as extortion, bribery, and arson, and for 
business enterprises involving gambling, liquor, drugs, or 
prostitution.

[[Page S12619]]

  This statute was passed in 1961 also with mafia-related criminal 
activity in mind.
  Now criminal street gangs travel interstate for another purpose which 
strikes at the heart of our system of justice--intimidating and 
retaliating against witnesses, jurors, informants, and victims.
  This bill would make it a crime to travel across state lines for that 
purpose and would allow for a sentence up to life imprisonment for 
someone who commits that crime.
  Defendants who violate the Travel Act and kill someone will also face 
a possible death sentence for such actions.
  This bill should ensure that prosecutors can use the Travel Act to 
act against crimes caused by the new Mafia: criminal street gangs.
  The bill also amends several criminal statutes to address violent 
crimes frequently or typically committed by gangs.
  These crimes include carjacking, assault, manslaughter, racketeering, 
illegal gun transfers to drug traffickers or violent criminals, the use 
of firearms in drug trafficking and violent crimes, and murder-for-
hire.
  These amendments make it easier for prosecutors to prove these crimes 
by eliminating or modifying the intent requirement for the crimes or by 
increasing the penalties for violations.
  This legislation also changes the venue statute for capital cases so 
that capital cases can be brought where the murder occurs or where the 
racketeering conspiracy, drug conspiracy, or criminal street gang 
operates. So, if the gang, commits the bulk of its crimes in one State 
but commits a capital crime in another State, all of the crimes can be 
tried in the same State where the gang focused its criminal activity 
and the government can seek the appropriate punishment for that crime. 
The jury will then get the whole picture of how the gang operated and 
what they did.

  Where a 16-year-old or 17-year-old has committed a Federal serious 
violent felony, this legislation facilitates Federal prosecution of 
such offenders. Surveys in 1996 and 1999 showed that 37-50 percent of 
gang members were under the age of 18. This legislation also calls upon 
the United States Sentencing Commission to create new sentencing 
guidelines for juvenile offenders who are charged as adults to address 
concerns specific to offenders of that age.
  The bill permits the Attorney General to designate high intensity 
interstate gang activity areas, HIIGAs, and authorizes $100,000,000 for 
each of 5 years for these task forces.
  These provisions are modeled after similar provisions creating high 
intensity drug trafficking areas, HIDTAs.
  HIDTAs are joint efforts of local, State, and Federal law enforcement 
agencies whose leaders work together to assess regional drug threats, 
design strategies to combat those threats, and develop initiatives to 
implement the strategies.
  HIDTAs are based on an equal partnership between different law 
enforcement agencies.
  HIDTAs are based on an equal partnership between different law 
enforcement agencies.
  HIDTAs integrate and synchronize efforts to reduce drug trafficking.
  They eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort and maximize 
resources.
  And they improve intelligence and information sharing both within and 
between regions.
  HIDTAs are necessary because drug trafficking tends to be ``head 
quartered'' in certain areas of the country, from which it spreads to 
other areas.
  Moreover, drug traffickers have been highly organized and developed 
sophisticated interstate and international operations.
  These points are also true for many criminal gangs. So we have 
erected a new program of cooperation between law enforcement agencies 
to attack the gang problem like we attack the drug problem.
  This bill authorizes $75 million over the next 5 years for the hiring 
of Federal prosecutors to identify and prosecute significant gangs 
within their districts under the Project Safe Neighborhoods program. 
Across the Nation, 94 Project Safe Neighborhoods Task Forces are 
working to implement the coordinated strategy to reduce gun violence, 
led by the U.S. Attorney in each of the Federal judicial districts. 
U.S. Attorneys have been working side by side with all law enforcement 
participants in their communities to identify the most pressing crime 
problems and attack those problems both through prevention and 
aggressive prosecution.
  Finally, this legislation would authorize $100 million dollars over 
the next 5 years for States to update their technology, create and fund 
gang prevention and community prosecution programs, and create and 
expand witness protection programs.
  Witness protection is a critical part of reducing gang violence. The 
president of the National District Attorneys Association, Robert 
McCulloch, who is also the district attorney in St. Louis, testified 
last month before the Judiciary Committee. He said that while his 
office is able to put witnesses in motels for a couple of days or a 
week or is able to send them on a bus ride to a relative's house, the 
solutions are not long-term. And as a result, the witnesses come back 
and are at risk. That is not acceptable. If witnesses are not confident 
that they will remain safe, they will not talk to law enforcement. It 
is as simple as that. We must give local and State law enforcement the 
tools to keep witnesses alive.

  While criminal street gangs flourish in certain urban areas such as 
Los Angeles and Chicago, they typically use these cities as bases to 
invade more rural locales.
  And the characteristics of a criminal street gang are extremely 
diverse. While some criminal street gangs are looser-affiliations of 
violent individuals who work together in furtherance of their gang, 
there are also some very highly disciplined, hierarchical 
``corporations,'' often encompassing numerous jurisdictions.
  MS-13, an international gang with roots in El Salvador's civil war 
has spread to at least 28 States and includes more than 8,000 members. 
In this gang there is no real command structure or national charter.
  And in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, criminal street gangs 
are largely neighborhood-based associations of lifelong friends. They 
use no flashy names or symbols, but they bank together to commit crimes 
and sell drugs.
  In the past three years, members of just three neighborhood-based 
gangs in Washington, D.C., called the 1-5 Mob, the K Street Crew and 
Murder Inc. by prosecutors, have been convicted of 57 murders and 
dozens of assaults and weapons offenses for gang crimes committed over 
the past ten years.
  On the other hand, there are some very organized and structured 
ruthless gangs in this country.
  The Gangster Disciples Nation, for example, has a chairman of the 
board, two boards of directors, one for prisons and one for streets), 
Governors, regents, area coordinators, enforcers, and ``shorties,'' 
youth who staff drug-selling sites and help with drug deals.
  From 1987 to 1994, this gang was responsible for killing more than 
200 people. Moreover, one-half of their arrests were for drug offenses 
and only one-third for nonlethal violence.
  And just like MS-13, these gangs pop up all across the country.
  In 1996, the Gangster Disciples Nation and other Chicago-based gangs 
were in 110 jurisdictions in 35 states.
  Members of the Los-Angeles based 18th Street Gang have migrated 
outside of California into the southwest border up into the Pacific 
Northwest, out to New Jersey, Mexico, and El Salvador. Los Angeles gang 
members have been tracked to Indianapolis, Oklahoma, Omaha, Raleigh and 
St. Louis.
  This bill is a necessary measure to target increasingly violent, 
increasingly sophisticated, and increasingly national gangs. This is 
not just a California problem, or a Chicago problem, or a District of 
Columbia problem--this problem is a nationwide in its scope, and we 
must craft a nationwide solution. This legislation will tackle that 
problem head-on. We simply cannot wait any longer.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact the Gang 
Prevention and Effective Deterrence Act of 2003.
      By Mr. ENZI (for himself, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Hagel, Mrs. 
        Hutchison, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Breaux, Mr. Bingaman, 
        Mr. Graham of Florida, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, and 
        Mr. Rockefeller):

[[Page S12620]]

  S. 1736. A bill to promote simplification and fairness in the 
administration and collection of sales and use taxes; to the Committee 
on Finance.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Streamlined 
Sales and Use Tax Act, a bill that will make it easier for American 
consumers and businesses to conduct sales from remote locations. Our 
bill will also help states begin to recover from years of budgetary 
shortfalls.
  This bill is not a disguised attempt to increase taxes or put a new 
tax on the Internet. Consumer are already supposed to pay sales and use 
taxes in most States for purchases made over the phone, by mail, or via 
the Internet. Unfortunately, most consumers are unaware they are 
required to pay this use tax on purchases for which retailers choose 
not to collect sales tax at the time of purchase.
  That means consumers who buy products online are required to keep 
track of their purchases and then pay outstanding use tax obligation on 
their State tax forms. Most people do not know this or comply with the 
requirement. As such, States are losing millions of dollars in annual 
revenue.
  Our legislation will help both consumers and States by reducing the 
burden on consumers and providing a mechanism that will allow States to 
systematically and fairly collect the taxes already owed to them.
  This bill is not about new taxes. Simply put, if Congress continues 
to allow remote sales taxes to go uncollected and electronic commerce 
continues to grow as predicted, other taxes--such as income or property 
taxes--will have to be increased to offset the lost revenue. I want to 
avoid that. That's why we need to implement a plan that will allow 
States to generate revenue using mechanisms already approved by their 
local leaders.
  This bill is about economic growth. Sales and use taxes provide 
critical revenue to pay for our schools, our police officers, 
firefighters, road construction, and more. It will bring more money--
money that is already owed--into rural areas that are struggling 
economically. It will also help businesses comply with the complicated 
States sales tax systems. That means the business resources that have 
historically been spent on tax compliance could be used, among other 
things, to hire new people and buy new equipment.

  This bill is about tax simplification. As the Supreme Court 
identified in the Quill versus North Dakota decision in 1992, the 
complicated State and local sales tax systems across this country have 
created an undue burden on sellers. Our bill will help relieve this 
burden by requiring States to meet the stringent simplification 
standards outlined in the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement. This 
bill requires States to implement and maintain these simplification 
measures before they can require any seller to collect and remit sales 
tax.
  The Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement includes dramatic 
simplification in almost every aspect of sales and use tax collection 
and administration, especially for multi-state sellers. Areas of 
simplification include exemption processing, uniform definitions, State 
level administration of local taxes, a reduced number of sales tax 
rates, determining the appropriate tax rate, and reduced audit burdens 
for sellers using the state-certified technology.
  I firmly believe this bill, coupled with the Agreement, will 
facilitate a change to our taxing system that benefit local and State 
governments, Main Street and online businesses, and consumers. I 
recognize that this legislation may not be perfect, but I welcome the 
opportunity to continue working with retailers, local and State 
lawmakers and my colleagues to address any remaining concerns. Our 
intention is to close the sales tax loophole for remote sales, and I am 
ready and willing to engage in discussions to ensure that this bill 
fairly accomplishes that objective.
  I thank my colleague, Senator Dorgan, for his tireless efforts on 
this issue. He has been instrumental in drafting this critical 
legislation, and I appreciate his insight and thoroughness. I would 
also like to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have 
agreed to be original cosponsors--Senators Dorgan, Breaux, Bingaman, 
Chafee, Bob Graham, Hagel, Hutchison, Johnson, Ben Nelson, Rockefeller, 
Voinovich, and my esteemed fellow Senator from Wyoming, Senator Thomas.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Enzi and others 
to introduce legislation to address the long-standing issue of how to 
see that the sales and uses taxes which are owed on remote sales, i.e., 
items bought from companies outside of the State in which the purchaser 
lives, can be fairly collected. The Simplified Sales and Use Tax Act 
which we introduce today will allow the States to require collection 
only after they have dramatically simplified their sales and use tax 
systems.
  Collecting a sales tax in a face-to-face transaction on Main Street 
or at the mall is a relatively simple process. The seller collects the 
tax and remits it to the State or local government. But with remote 
sales--such as catalog and Internet sales--it's more difficult. States 
cannot require a seller to collect a sales tax unless the business has 
an actual location or sales people in the State. So most States, and 
many localities, have laws that require the local buyer to send an 
equivalent ``use tax'' to the State or local government when he or she 
did not pay taxes at the time of purchase.
  The reality, of course, is that customers almost never do that. It 
would be a major inconvenience, and people are not accustomed to paying 
sales taxes in that way. So, despite the legal requirement, most simply 
don't do it, and the tax, which is already owed, goes unpaid. For 
years, State and local governments could accept this loss because 
catalog sales were a relatively minor portion of overall commerce. But, 
as e-commerce continues to grow so does the competitive divide between 
those businesses with and without the collection burden and the local 
governments who are losing an ever larger share of sales tax revenues.
  In fact, it appears as if local governments are facing a perfect 
storm of dwindling economic activity, and a growing migration of 
commerce from Main Street to the Internet. As online consumer purchases 
have nearly doubled in the last 2 years estimates are that States and 
localities lost at least $13.5 billion in uncollected sales and use tax 
revenues in 2002, and that number is expected to grow to $45 billion by 
2006.
  Internet and catalog sellers correctly argue that collecting and 
remitting sales taxes would be a significant burden. Understandably, 
they contend that, unless things change, it would be difficult for them 
to have to comply with tax laws from thousands of different 
jurisidictions--46 States and thousands of local governments--with 
different tax rates and all of the idiosyncrasies regarding what is 
taxable and what is non-taxable.
  This is a legitimate complaint, and I understand why the Supreme 
Court agreed with them when it decided that companies have to have a 
physical presence in a State before being required to collect sales 
taxes.
  But, in so ruling the Court did two things: (1) it told the States to 
simplify their sales and use tax systems, and (2) it invited Congress 
to define how much simplification will be needed so that collection 
will no longer be an impermissible burden on interstate commerce.
  The States have since responded to the Court's ruling with the 
``Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement.'' Approved by 34 States and 
the District of Columbia after extensive discussions with the business 
community this unprecedented agreement will dramatically simplify and 
streamline how State sales taxes are identified and collected. And, by 
harmonizing State sales tax rules, bringing uniformity to definitions 
of items in the sales tax base, significantly reducing the paperwork 
burden on retailers, and incorporating a seamless electronic reporting 
process the agreement will significantly reduce the burden of 
collection on all sellers. Once adopted by 10 States with at least 20 
percent of the population, the Simplified Sales and Use Tax Act would 
give those States the authority to collect sales or use taxes equally 
from all retailers.
  I understand that some have raised questions about how the small 
business exemption included in this legislation will be applied, and I 
intend to work with those interested parties to try to address this 
matter. However, sales and

[[Page S12621]]

use tax simplification is an important issue that Congress must address 
sooner rather than later. The legislation we introduce today is 
workable and strikes a fair balance between the interests of consumers, 
local retailers and remote sellers.
  Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this much-needed 
bipartisan legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN:
  S. 1737. A bill to amend the Clayton Act to enhance the authority of 
the Federal Trade Commission or the Attorney General to prevent 
anticompetitive practices in tightly concentrated gasoline markets; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, it's time to bring competition back into 
our Nation's gasoline markets. Across America, gasoline prices have 
recently soared to the highest levels ever. Right now, gasoline costs 
12 cents more than it did at this time last year. In my home State of 
Oregon, folks are paying a whopping 32 cents more per gallon than in 
October of last year.
  Proven price manipulation is siphoning competition out of the 
gasoline markets and stealing money from Americans' wallets. It's time 
that government regulators opened their eyes to reality of rampant 
price manipulation by gas companies and protected American consumers 
from getting pummeled at the pump. That's why today I am introducing 
the Gasoline Free Market Competition Act.
  Every extra penny Americans spend on the artificially inflated price 
of gasoline is a penny they aren't spending on other things--like 
clothes, groceries, or other consumer items. The difference is that 
buying a new washer dryer helps create jobs; paying extra for gas only 
creates a fatter bottom line for oil companies, nothing more.
  With people losing their jobs and the economy in sorry shape, 
Congress should act right now to protect the American people from oil 
company price gouging. Artificially inflated gas prices hurt American 
families three ways: it steals dollars from their pocketbooks, slows 
down job creation, and often raises the price of the goods families 
need to buy due to increased transport costs.
  Folks are looking to Congress to address gasoline price spikes and 
industry pricing policies that can't always be explained away by the 
market. But as the American people have called out for relief, the 
Federal government has stayed silent--refusing to respond in any 
meaningful way to the gas price crisis.
  The Secretary of Energy says he's conducting an informal 
investigation to look into the issue. But under current law, the 
Department of Energy has no power to do anything about gasoline prices.
  On the other hand, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) does have the 
power to protect consumers from gas price manipulation. Yet they've 
done almost nothing. They turned aside evidence of serious, documented 
anti-consumer practices--such as redlining and zone price--that inflate 
gas prices. They've argued that they can only prosecute if they find 
out-and-out collusion, setting out a standard that is almost impossible 
to prove against savvy oil interests.
  You can see the results of the FTC's inaction at gas stations in 
Oregon and all across America. Nationwide, gasoline markets in Oregon 
and at least 27 other States are now considered to be ``tight 
oligopolies'' with 4 companies controlling more than 60 percent of the 
gasoline supplies. The problem is particularly dire in the West, where 
California, Oregon, Washington and Idaho are four of the top six States 
for high gas prices today.

  In these tightly concentrated markets, numerous studies have found 
oil company practices are driving independent wholesalers and dealers 
out of the market. One practice they employ, called ``redlining,'' 
limits where independent distributors can sell their gasoline. As a 
result, independent stations must buy their gasoline directly from the 
oil company, usually at a higher price than the company's own brand-
name stations pay. With these higher costs, the independent stations 
can't compete.
  Redlining is just the tip of the iceberg. Investigations have also 
found oil companies controlling not just stations' buying choices, but 
also distributors' selling prices. Companies engage in a practice 
called zone pricing, basing prices not on the cost of producing 
gasoline, but on the maximum a neighborhood will pay. They have 
squeezed out smaller refineries that could increase supply and 
introduce new competitions. They have exported gasoline and oil to Asia 
at rock-bottom prices, making up their profits by sticking West Coast 
consumers with the difference. So, stopping one anti-competitive 
practice, by itself, won't get the job done.
  The solution is to update antitrust law to prohibit anti-competitive 
practices by single companies in concentrated markets. The current 
standard of collusion is unenforceable. Smart oil companies will never 
hole up in a room and collude to set prices; they don't need to.
  Chevron/Texaco's North American President David Reeves admitted to a 
congressional panel that the West Coast gasoline market is so dominated 
by a limited number of large committed refinery/marketers whose 
individual actions can have significant market impact.
  Here's how the Gasoline Free Market Competition Act would tackle the 
problem. First, the Federal Government would establish consumer watch 
zones for concentrated gasoline markets. Where control is concentrated, 
supplies can be manipulated, and competition restricted with ease. 
Where that capability is ready-made, the FTC should watch markets more 
carefully.
  Oil companies employing anti-competitive practices in consumer watch 
zones should have to prove they're not hurting consumers. The whole 
litany of anti-competitive practices should be considered presumptively 
illegal. That includes exporting at a discount and pressuring 
independents--all the practices that manipulate supply or limit 
competition.
  Consumer watch zones would also be empowerment zones for quick action 
by the FTC. In these zones, the agency could issue cease and desist 
orders to companies participating in these anti-competitive practices, 
forcing them to stop gouging consumers.
  These legislative proposals are first steps toward bringing back 
competition to the Nation's gasoline markets. Congress should act now 
to address the problem of skyrocketing gasoline prices--because even 
the oil companies admit the market won't solve the problem on its own. 
Last month, a report by the Rand Corporation revealed that even oil 
industry officials are predicting more price volatility in the future. 
That means consumers can expect more frequent and larger price spikes 
in the next few years.
  I have spent years documenting unethical and anti-competitive 
practices in this country's gasoline markets--practices that have 
driven prices up and driven consumers crazy at the pump. The American 
people deserve relief from high gas prices and the Congress should act 
on their behalf.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. DODD:
  S. 1738. A bill to reauthorize the Defense Production Act of 1950, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the 
bill be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                S. 1738

       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 ``Defense Production Act 
     Reauthorization of 2003''.

     SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT OF 1950.

       (a) In General.--The 1st sentence of section 717(a) of the 
     Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2166(a)) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``sections 708'' and inserting ``sections 
     707, 708,''; and
       (2) by striking ``September 30, 2003'' and inserting 
     ``September 30, 2004''.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 711(b) of the 
     Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2161(b)) is 
     amended by striking ``through 2003'' and inserting ``through 
     2004''.

     SEC. 3. RESOURCE SHORTFALL FOR RADIATION-HARDENED 
                   ELECTRONICS.

       (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the limitation contained 
     in section 303(a)(6)(C) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 
     (50 U.S.C. App. 2093(a)(6)(C)), the President may take 
     actions under section 303 of the Defense Production Act of 
     1950 to correct the industrial resource shortfall for 
     radiation-hardened

[[Page S12622]]

     electronics, to the extent that such Presidential actions do 
     not cause the aggregate outstanding amount of all such 
     actions to exceed $200,000,000.
       (b) Report by the Secretary.--Before the end of the 6-month 
     period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Defense shall submit a report to the 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the House 
     of Representatives describing--
       (1) the current state of the domestic industrial base for 
     radiation-hardened electronics;
       (2) the projected requirements of the Department of Defense 
     for radiation-hardened electronics;
       (3) the intentions of the Department of Defense for the 
     industrial base for radiation-hardened electronics; and
       (4) the plans of the Department of Defense for use of 
     providers of radiation-hardened electronics beyond the 
     providers with which the Department had entered into 
     contractual arrangements under the authority of the Defense 
     Production Act of 1950, as of the date of the enactment of 
     this Act.

     SEC. 4. CLARIFICATION OF PRESIDENTIAL AUTHORITY.

       Subsection (a) of section 705 of the Defense Production Act 
     of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2155(a)) is amended by inserting 
     after the end of the 1st sentence the following new sentence: 
     ``The authority of the President under this section includes 
     the authority to obtain information in order to perform 
     industry studies assessing the capabilities of the United 
     States industrial base to support the national defense.''.

     SEC. 5. CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION AND RESTORATION.

       Section 702 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 
     U.S.C. App. 2152) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3) through (17) as 
     paragraphs (4) through (18), respectively;
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(3) Critical infrastructure.--The term `critical 
     infrastructure' means any systems and assets, whether 
     physical or cyber-based, so vital to the United States that 
     the degradation or destruction of such systems and assets 
     would have a debilitating impact on national security, 
     including, but not limited to, national economic security and 
     national public health or safety.''; and
       (3) in paragraph (14) (as so redesignated by paragraph (1) 
     of this section), by inserting ``and critical infrastructure 
     protection and restoration'' before the period at the end of 
     the last sentence.

     SEC. 6. REPORT ON CONTRACTING WITH MINORITY- AND WOMEN-OWNED 
                   BUSINESSES.

       (a) Report Required.--Before the end of the 1-year period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
     Secretary of Defense shall submit a report to the Committee 
     on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the 
     Committee on Financial Services of the House of 
     Representatives on the extent to which contracts entered into 
     during the fiscal year ending before the end of such 1-year 
     period under the Defense Production Act of 1950 have been 
     contracts with minority- and women-owned businesses.
       (b) Contents of Report.--The report submitted under 
     subsection (a) shall include the following:
       (1) The types of goods and services obtained under 
     contracts with minority- and women-owned businesses under the 
     Defense Production Act of 1950 in the fiscal year covered in 
     the report.
       (2) The dollar amounts of such contracts.
       (3) The ethnicity of the majority owners of such minority- 
     and women-owned businesses.
       (4) A description of the types of barriers in the 
     contracting process, such as requirements for security 
     clearances, that limit contracting opportunities for 
     minority- and women-owned businesses, together with such 
     recommendations for legislative or administrative action as 
     the Secretary of Defense may determine to be appropriate for 
     increasing opportunities for contracting with minority- and 
     women-owned businesses and removing barriers to such 
     increased participation.
       (c) Definitions.--For purposes of this section, the terms 
     ``women-owned business'' and ``minority-owned business'' have 
     the meanings given such terms in section 21A(r) of the 
     Federal Home Loan Bank Act, and the term ``minority'' has the 
     meaning given such term in section 1204(c)(3) of the 
     Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act 
     of 1989.

     SEC. 7. COMMERCE RESPONSIBILITIES REGARDING CONSULTATION WITH 
                   FOREIGN NATIONS.

       (a) Offsets in Defense Procurements.--Section 123(c) of the 
     Defense Production Act Amendments of 1992 (50 U.S.C. App. 
     2099 note) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(c) Negotiations.--
       ``(1) Interagency team.--It is the policy of Congress that 
     the President shall designate the Secretary of Commerce to 
     lead, in coordination with the Secretary of State, an 
     interagency team to negotiate with foreign nations the 
     elimination of offset arrangements, industrial participation, 
     or similar arrangements in defense procurement. The President 
     shall transmit an annual report on the results of these 
     negotiations to the Congress as part of the report required 
     under section 309(a) of the Defense Production Act of 1950.
       ``(2) Recommendations for modifications.--Pending the 
     elimination of the arrangements described in paragraph (1), 
     the interagency team shall submit to the Secretary of Defense 
     any recommendations for modifications of a memorandum of 
     understanding entered into under section 2531 of title 10, 
     United States Code, or a related agreement that the team 
     considers to be an appropriate response to a contractual 
     offset, industrial participation, or similar arrangement that 
     is entered into under the policy to which section 2532 of 
     such title applies.
       ``(3) Notification to ustr regarding offsets.--If the 
     interagency team determines that a foreign country is 
     pursuing a policy on contractual offset arrangements, 
     industrial participation arrangements, or similar 
     arrangements in connection with the purchase of defense 
     equipment or supplies that requires compensation for the 
     purchase in the form of nondefense or dual-use equipment or 
     supplies in a value greater than the defense equipment or 
     supplies, the team shall notify the United States Trade 
     Representative of that determination. Upon receipt of the 
     notification, the United States Trade Representative shall 
     treat the policy and each such arrangement as an act, policy, 
     or practice by the foreign country that is unjustifiable and 
     burdens or restricts United States commerce for purposes of 
     section 304(a)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
     2414(a)(1)), and shall take appropriate action under title 
     III of such Act with respect to such country.''.
       (b) Report on Effects of Foreign Contracts on Domestic 
     Contractors.--Section 309(d)(1) of the Defense Production Act 
     of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2099(d)(1)) is amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``and'' at the end; 
     and
       (2) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period at the end 
     and inserting the following: ``; and
       ``(F) a compilation of data delineating--
       ``(i) the impact of foreign contracts that have been 
     awarded through offsets, industrial participation agreements, 
     or similar arrangements, on domestic prime contractors, and 
     at least the first three tiers of subcontractors; and
       ``(ii) details of contracts with foreign 1st, 2nd, and 3rd 
     tier subcontractors awarded through offsets, industrial 
     participation agreements, or similar arrangements.''.

                          ____________________