Congressional Record, Volume 149 Issue 144 (Wednesday, October 15, 2003)

[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.''.

____________________