[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 60 (Tuesday, May 4, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4839-S4844]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. BUNNING (for himself and Mr. Miller):
S. 2376. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal
the scheduled restrictions in the child tax credit, marriage penalty
relief, and 10 percent rate bracket, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. BUNNING. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce The Working
Family Tax Relief Act of 2004. I would like to thank my colleague,
Senator Miller, for his support of this important legislation. His
leadership has laid the foundation of bipartisan support that this
critical tax bill and working American families deserve.
Tax relief has contributed to economic growth throughout our economy.
We have successfully encouraged companies to create more jobs and
Americans to save and spend more. The President's tax cuts and our
votes here in the Senate helped to revive an economy that was sagging
in 2000 and shocked by the tragedies of September 11, 2001.
We put a plan in place in 2001 to help the American family to keep
more of the money they work so hard to earn. In 2003, Congress saw fit
to accelerate the effective date of some of this family tax relief in
order to give these families this help as quickly as possible. As a
result, every American family who paid any income taxes during 2003 saw
a reduction in their taxes and they will enjoy those lower taxes for
this year as well. However, if we do not act this year, America's
working families will face a tax increase next year. We cannot allow
this to happen.
The lowest-income Americans have benefited dramatically from the new
10 percent tax bracket. Today, thanks to this new bracket, working
Americans are keeping more of their hard-earned paychecks. But if we do
nothing, taxpayers with as little as $7,000 in taxable income could
face a tax increase next year. My legislation proposes to keep the
current 10 percent tax rate bracket in place rather than allowing it to
shrink and increase taxes on the working families of America. This
extension could bring relief to as many as 1.2 million people in
Kentucky and millions of others throughout the country.
And, if we do nothing, the child tax credit will be cut by 30 percent
in 2005. We need to keep the $1,000 tax credit and not let it revert to
the old $700 credit. There are over 350,000 taxpayers in Kentucky who
need this tax relief and will benefit from this legislation. We can't
ask millions of Americans to pay an extra $300 per child next year.
Will you ask the families of this country, who have worked so hard to
raise our entire economy up, to pay more in taxes simply because they
have children? I know I won't, and I hope my colleagues won't either.
The accelerated marriage penalty relief will also lapse after this
year unless the Senate acts. I propose keeping the current tax
deduction in place, which we increased to twice that of an individual
taxpayer in 2003. Without this extension, married couples will see a
cut in their standardized deduction--actually penalizing couples for
being married. Over 465,000 Kentuckians benefits from this legislation.
We need to keep this important tax relief intact.
And finally we need to address an unintended consequence of the
Alternative Minimum Tax. When the Senate passed the AMT, it was
designed to ensure wealthier Americans paid at least some percentage of
their income in taxes. Now that same AMT is hurting working families
and middle-income America. In 2003, the Senate passed limited AMT
relief that is now set to expire. This legislation will keep the
current exemption levels of $40,250 for single and $58,000 for married
taxpayers in place for 2005. If we fail to act, an additional $7,000 to
$13,000 of middle-income taxpayers' income will be subject to this tax.
We all know that the AMT is a serious issue and one that we must
address--the limited relief contained in this bill is not a final
solution to this large problem, but it will keep the problem from
getting even worse.
There are other important tax cuts that should be extended and there
are other problems with the tax code that I would like to correct. But
the four provisions addressed in this bill have to be addressed today
not just to provide tax relief, but to prevent an immediate tax
increase. We owe it to the working families and low-income Americans
who rely on these tax cuts to act quickly and extend these four
provisions--the 10 percent tax bracket, child tax credit, marriage
penalty relief and AMT relief. Working American families and lower to
middle-income America were hit hard with the economic downturn--that is
why we passed these tax cuts in the first place. And now, just as these
industrious Americans have started to find new jobs and spend a little
more money to grow the economy, we cannot hold them back with a tax
increase.
And I can't stress this point enough. Many Americans--especially low
and middle income families--will have their tax rates increased and
face cuts in their deductions and credits unless we act. My bill is
about extending the important tax breaks that we all agreed to in 2001
and accelerated in 2003. We made a commitment to the American family in
the midst of an economic downturn--offering them tax relief to help
stimulate the economy. And now that these tax cuts are starting to
work, we can't afford to take them back. We must stay the course and
support our Nation's families as we move the American economy forward
toward renewed prosperity.
I know how tight government finances are likely to be this year. And
as my colleagues know, I have always taken a hard look at spending
proposals. But we built about $80 billion into the Senate-passed FY
2005 Budget proposal for these tax provisions. And there are similar
provisions in the House-approved budget. I am confident that we can
secure the amount we will need for this proposal over the next few
years.
We find ourselves in a unique position--we must be proactive to
protect the American family from an unjust tax increase. We need to
take a stand for low and middle income America. This Bunning-Miller tax
relief legislation will protect working Americans from what would be a
devastating tax increase in 2005. I urge my colleagues to get behind
this bipartisan legislation and support the Working Family Tax Relief
Act of 2004.
______
By Mr. JEFFORDS (for himself and Mr. SARBANES):
S. 2377. A bill to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to ensure that
the District of Columbia and States are provided with a safe, lead-free
supply of drinking water; to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works.
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Lead-Free
Drinking Water Act of 2004 with my colleague Senator Sarbanes. We are
joined by our colleagues, Congresswoman Norton, Congressman Waxman, and
others, who will be introducing the House companion bill today.
I was horrified, as I imagine we all were, when it was first reported
that lead levels in DC public water system was significantly higher
than Federal guidelines, and had been so for at least two years. I
asked myself the same thing thousands of DC residents were asking
themselves--why weren't we told about this sooner. How much water did I
drink? How much water did my children drink? What are the effects of
lead in our blood stream? What are the long-term effects? What are we
going to do about it?
This is a pretty sad situation no matter where you live, but it is
especially upsetting when you live in the Capital
[[Page S4840]]
of the free world. Clearly, mistakes were made and changes are needed--
because if it can happen in Washington, DC or Boston, it can happen
anywhere.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of which I am the
ranking member, held a hearing on this issue last month, and we heard
some pretty compelling testimony from DC residents, health experts,
risk management professionals and government officials.
But we are going to do more than just hold hearings; today we are
introducing the Lead-Free Drinking Waste Act of 2004.
Our bill will overhaul the Safe Drinking Water Act to strengthen the
Federal rules governing lead testing and regulations in our public
water systems to ensure that our most vulnerable citizens--infants,
children, pregnant women, and new moms--are not harmed by lead in the
drinking water.
Specifically, the bill requires the EPA to re-evaluate the current
regulatory structure to figure out if it really provides the level of
public health protection required.
The bill calls on the EPA to establish a maximum contaminant level
for lead at the tap, and if that is not practical given the presence of
lead inside home plumbing systems, the bill requires EPA to re-evaluate
the current action level for lead to ensure that vulnerable populations
such as infants, children, pregnant women, and nursing mothers receive
adequate protection.
I look forward to working with EPA on this evaluation to determine
which approach is most feasible and which provides the greatest level
of public health protection.
EPA has three choices--keep current standard, an ``action level'' at
15 parts per billion; lower the current action level below 15 parts per
billion; or establish a ``maximum contaminant load.''
For example, it is clear that a maximum contaminant level, which is
measured at the water treatment plant, would do little to protect
people from lead-contaminated drinking water at their faucets. Our bill
requires that standards be measured at the top.
It is also clear that a low lead action level measured at the tap
could provide more protection than a high MCL measured anywhere in the
system if there were extremely strong and effective public notification
procedures in place.
Public notice is the key to success of any lead regulation-parents
say to me, ``If only I had known, I could have protected my family.''
It is our job to be sure the public notice system we have in place gets
people the information they need when they need it.
The bill will require that information such as the number of homes
tested, the lead levels found, the areas of the community in which they
were located, and the disproportionate adverse health effects of lead
on infants, be made public immediately upon detection of lead.
In addition, the bill requires that, as part of routine testing
conducted, any residents whose homes test high for lead receive
notification within 14 days, and appropriate medical referrals.
Finally, we don't want the day of an exceedance to be the first time
people have heard about lead in drinking water. The bill establishes a
basic public education program to ensure that people have a basic
understanding that lead may be present in drinking water and what the
corrective actions might be even before their water system detects a
problem.
Right now, EPA can't say if we have a national problem or not. We
need one-time nationwide testing for lead in drinking water at all
water systems to determine if DC is an isolated case or if there are
other ``sleeping giants'' out there.
The bill requires increased water testing and lead remediation in
schools and day-care centers nationwide. This provision exists in law
today, but it was affected by previous litigation. This bill corrects
the problem by requiring the Administrator to execute this program if
States choose not to. It is wholly unacceptable to do anything less
than provide a learning environment for our next generation that does
not degrade their intellectual capacity. Our bill provides $150 million
over five years for this program. And we strengthen existing
requirements to ensure that ALL lead service lines will be replaced by
a public water system at a rate of 10 percent per year until they are
gone. It provides more Federal funding to upgrade water distribution
systems to replace lead service lines.
This is common sense--let's get rid of the lead in our distribution
systems and get rid of the lead in our water.
Our bill makes the water systems responsible for replacing lead
service lines, including the privately-owned sections, once a system
exceeds lead standards. Homeowners have the final say in whether their
line is replaced. We provide $1 billion over five years for lead
service line replacement.
The EPA estimates that our Nation needs 265 billion dollars to
maintain and improve its drinking water infrastructure over the next
twenty years. If we don't address this, we will be facing more and more
health and environmental issues as our Nation's water infrastructure
degrades.
Lead service lines are only one part of the picture. Leaded solder
was banned in 1987. However, ``lead-free'' plumbing fixtures are
currently allowed to have eight percent lead. Our bill bans leaded
plumbing fixtures and components.
It is time to get the lead out of our pipes, out of our water, out of
our families and out of our lives. Safe drinking water is not a
privilege; it is a right--whether you live in Washington, DC, or
Washington State or Washington County, VT.
We hope to move this bill this year. My Committee is scheduled to
consider water infrastructure legislation later this month, and I think
the ``Lead-Free Drinking Water Act of 2004'' would be an important
addition to that bill.
I just want to say it has been an honor to work with Senator
Sarbanes, Congresswoman Norton, and Congressman Waxman on this vitally
important issue.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. Ensign):
S. 2378. A bill to provide for the conveyance of certain public land
in Clark County, Nevada, for use as a heliport; to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. REID. Mr. President. I arise today to introduce legislation to
establish a public heliport facility in Clark County, NV.
The purpose of my bill is simple: It would convey about a third of a
square mile of public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management to
Clark County for dedicated use as a heliport. The land is located just
south of the Henderson city limits and east of Interstate 15.
The establishment of this heliport will help eliminate the ongoing
conflict between air tour operators whose overflights of the Grand
Canyon represent a classic component of the Las Vegas visitor
experience and residents in the west-central and southwestern parts of
the Las Vegas Valley whose every day lives are adversely affected by
helicopter noise.
For many months now, local officials have sought to establish a
heliport on County or private land within the Las Vegas Valley. Their
chosen site is currently a go-kart track near Interstate 15 near
Henderson. If this site is developed as a heliport facility, helicopter
tour operators will soon be flying over the Sloan Canyon National
Conservation Area. In fact, if Congress does not enact my bill, air
tours will soon be flying over Sloan Canyon itself--one of the richest
petroglyph sites in the Mohave Desert. That outcome would be entirely
legal, entirely predictable and entirely regrettable.
In 2002, I worked closely with Senator Ensign, Congresswoman Berkley,
Congressman Gibbons and local advocates to ensure protection of the
Sloan Canyon area and its unique cultural resources. Through our
combined efforts we created the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area
and the McCullough Mountains Wilderness. I am proud of these efforts
and today I offer this legislation as a further effort to protect the
precious resources that we worked to safeguard in 2002.
The bill I am introducing in the Senate today would not prohibit
helicopter overflights of the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area
but it would ensure that such flights steer clear of the most sensitive
and special cultural resources and minimize the impact on the majestic
bighorn sheep and other wildlife that live in the McCullough Mountains.
[[Page S4841]]
My legislation stipulates that any helicopter flight originating from
and/or landing at this heliport would be required by law to fly no
further than 5 miles north of the southernmost boundary of the Sloan
Canyon National Conservation Area and at least 500 to 1000 feet above
ground level while in the NCA. Further, it requires that every such
light contribute 3 dollars per passenger to a special fund dedicated to
the protection of the cultural, wilderness, and wildlife resources in
Nevada.
These provisions justify conveying the land to Clark County at no
cost because they provide a stable, long-term source of funding in
excess of the market value of the land and because the conveyance and
use are in the public interest.
I look forward to working with the Chairman and Ranking member of the
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and my other Senate
colleagues to ensure swift passage of this important legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2378
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF PROPERTY TO CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the Las Vegas Valley in the State of Nevada is the
fastest growing community in the United States;
(2) helicopter tour operations are conflicting with the
needs of long-established residential communities in the
Valley; and
(3) the designation of a public heliport in the Valley that
would reduce conflicts between helicopter tour operators and
residential communities is in the public interest.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to provide a
suitable location for the establishment of a commercial
service heliport facility to serve the Las Vegas Valley in
the State of Nevada while minimizing and mitigating the
impact of air tours on the Sloan Canyon National Conservation
Area and North McCullough Mountains Wilderness.
(c) Definitions.--In this Act:
(1) Conservation area.--The term ``Conservation Area''
means the Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area established
by section 604(a) of the Clark County Conservation of Public
Land and Natural Resources Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2010).
(2) County.--The term ``County'' means Clark County,
Nevada.
(3) Helicopter tour.--
(A) In general.--The term ``helicopter tour'' means a
commercial helicopter tour operated for profit.
(B) Exclusion.--The term ``helicopter tour'' does not
include a helicopter tour that is carried out to assist a
Federal, State, or local agency.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(5) Wilderness.--The term ``Wilderness'' means the North
McCullough Mountains Wilderness established by section
202(a)(13) of the Clark County Conservation of Public Land
and Natural Resources Act of 2002 (116 Stat. 2000).
(d) Conveyance.--As soon as practicable after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall convey to the
County, subject to valid existing rights, for no
consideration, all right, title, and interest of the United
States in and to the parcel of land described in subsection
(e).
(e) Description of Land.--The parcel of land to be conveyed
under subsection (d) is the parcel of approximately 229 acres
of land depicted as tract A on the map entitled ``Clark
County Public Heliport Facility'' and dated May 3, 2004.
(f) Use of Land.--
(1) In general.--The parcel of land conveyed under
subsection (d)--
(A) shall be used by the County for the operation of a
heliport facility under the conditions stated in paragraphs
(2) and (3); and
(B) shall not be disposed of by the County.
(2) Imposition of fees.--
(A) In general.--Any operator of a helicopter tour
originating from or concluding at the parcel of land
described in subsection (e) shall pay to the Clark County
Department of Aviation a $3 conservation fee for each
passenger on the helicopter tour if any portion of the
helicopter tour occurs over the Conservation Area.
(B) Disposition of funds.--Any amounts collected under
subparagraph (A) shall be deposited in a special account in
the Treasury of the United States, which shall be available
to the Secretary, without further appropriation, for the
management of cultural, wildlife, and wilderness resources on
public land in the State of Nevada.
(3) Flight path.--Except for safety reasons, any helicopter
tour originating or concluding at the parcel of land
described in subsection (e) that flies over the Conservation
Area shall not fly--
(A) over any area in the Conservation Area except the area
that is between 3 and 5 miles north of the latitude of the
southernmost boundary of the Conservation Area;
(B) lower than 1,000 feet over the eastern segments of the
boundary of the Conservation Area; or
(C) lower than 500 feet over the western segments of the
boundary of the Conservation Area.
(4) Reversion.--If the County ceases to use any of the land
described in subsection (d) for the purpose described in
paragraph (1)(A) and under the conditions stated in
paragraphs (2) and (3)--
(A) title to the parcel shall revert to the United States,
at the option of the United States; and
(B) the County shall be responsible for any reclamation
necessary to revert the parcel to the United States.
(g) Administrative Costs.--The Secretary shall require, as
a condition of the conveyance under subsection (d), that the
County pay the administrative costs of the conveyance,
including survey costs and any other costs associated with
the transfer of title.
______
By Mr. SUNUNU (for himself, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Warner, and Mr.
Gregg):
S. 2380. A bill to authorize the President to issue posthumously to
the late William ``Billy'' Mitchell a commission as major general,
United States Army; to the Committee on Armed Services.
Mr. SUNUNU. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to honor one
of the Nation's great military visionaries, the late William ``Billy''
Mitchell. My legislation would correct an injustice that has existed
for almost eight decades by calling on the President to posthumously
award Billy Mitchell a commission as major general in the United States
Army.
I would like to first recognize the support this measure has received
from the Senator from Alaska, Mr. Stevens, the Chairman of the
Appropriations Committee and the Subcommittee on Defense
Appropriations, the Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, the Chairman of
the Armed Services Committee, and the Senator from New Hampshire, Mr.
Gregg, who is a member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. And
I would also like to commend my colleague in the House, Mr. Bass, who,
with the support of House Armed Services Chairman Duncan Hunter,
steered identical legislation to unanimous passage in that chamber in
the fall of last year. I am pleased to join my colleagues as we
recognize the accomplishments of this important figure in our country's
military history.
Billy Mitchell joined the Army at age 18 in 1898. As he quickly rose
in rank, he began to realize the incredible potential for air power in
establishing military superiority. After World War I, Billy Mitchell
became a brigadier general and deputy commander of the Air Service, and
in this position he began pressing senior military officials and the
White House for increased funding for the development of a formidable
air force. In fact, he conducted a test for senior Army and Navy
officials in the Chesapeake Bay in 1921 that bolstered his contention
that air power represented the future of combat, while embarrassing
many naysayers.
Although Billy Mitchell was long on vision and foresight, he was
short on tact. After the 1921 test, his relationship with his superiors
deteriorated as his very public battle for Air Service funding had
taken an increasingly bitter tone, and after an accident that took the
lives of Navy sailors, Mitchell accused senior military leaders of
``almost treasonable administration of the national defense.'' He was
court-martialed for insubordination, found guilty, sentenced to 5 years
loss of pay, and demoted to the rank of colonel. Yet to the surprise of
no one, Billy Mitchell continued to be a strong and effective voice in
support of air power after resigning his commission in 1926 until his
untimely death 10 years later.
Billy Mitchell sacrificed his career to help change the way our
country defends itself and projects military force across the globe to
protect and preserve freedom. We have seen over time--most recently
during the war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq--how important air
power is in achieving our military objectives. Mitchell's
prognostications many years ago about the future of air power has been
proven correct many times over, and it is now time for our nation to
recognize the enormous contribution Billy Mitchell has made to the
citizens and soldiers of the United States of America. I urge my
colleagues to support this bill to finally give the late Billy Mitchell
the rank of major general, United States Army.
[[Page S4842]]
______
By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. Feingold, and Mrs. Clinton):
S. 2381. A bill to provide for earned adjustment to reward work,
reunify families, establish a temporary worker program that protects
United States and foreign workers and strengthen national security
under the immigration laws of the United States; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to introduce the Safe
Orderly Legal Visas and Enforcement (SOLVE) Act of 2004.
Much of the Nation's economy today depends on the hard work and the
many contributions of immigrants. Many industries depend heavily on
immigrant labor. These workers enrich our Nation and improve the
quality of our lives. Yet millions of today's immigrant workers are
undocumented. These workers and their families live in constant fear of
deportation, and are easy targets of abuse and exploitation by
unscrupulous employers and by criminals. Many risk great danger, and
even death, to cross our borders.
For important reasons--to strengthen national security, to guarantee
sound economic and labor practices, and to ensure fundamental
fairness--it is essential to reform our immigration system. We need
immigration policies that provide a safe, orderly system where legality
is the prevailing norm. We need immigration policies that reflect
current economic realities, that respect the core values of family
unity and fundamental fairness and that uphold our proud tradition as a
Nation of immigrants.
These are complex issues, deserving careful consideration and debate.
But they are also issues that demand immediate attention. Our bill
creates a genuine earned legalization program for undocumented workers
and a revised temporary worker program with protections for both U.S.
and foreign workers. It also creates a realistic path to citizenship
for all deserving immigrants, and takes clear steps to reunite
immigrant families.
The legislation will benefit both workers and businesses. It improves
wages and working conditions, and provides an effective way for
foreign-born workers to become permanent residents if they wish to do
so. It benefits immigrant families by reducing the unacceptable
backlogs and obstacles that have separated families for too many years.
Family unity has always been a fundamental cornerstone of America's
immigration policy. Despite this fact, over three million individuals
are awaiting immigrant visas in order to reunite with their families.
This bill will allow immigrant families to be reunited more quickly and
humanely. It also removes other obstacles in our current immigration
laws that are separating families, such as the stringent affidavit-of-
support requirements and the bars to admissibility.
No immigration proposal is complete without an earned adjustment
program. Hard-working immigrants living in the United States contribute
to the economic growth and prosperity of our Nation. Immigrant workers
are, and will continue to be, essential to the success of many American
businesses. Our legislation will allow these long-term, tax-paying
immigrants to apply for earned adjustment of status, providing
employers with a more stable workforce and improving the wages and
working conditions of all workers.
A revised temporary worker program is a necessary component of any
immigration reform, but it cannot stand alone. It must be enacted in
conjunction with earned legalization and family unity priorities, and
it must avoid the troubling legacy of exploitation that has marred past
guest worker programs.
This legislation strikes a fair balance. It will ensure that
individuals participating in the program receive the same labor
protections as those given to U.S. workers, including the right to
organize, the right to change jobs between employers and economic
sectors, and the protection of wages, hours, and working conditions.
Anything else would subject migrants to abuse, and undermine the jobs,
wages and working conditions of U.S. workers. The bill also provides
participants with an opportunity to become permanent residents, and
eventually citizens, if they wish to do so. Without such an
opportunity, we will be creating second class status for temporary
workers.
Since the terrorist attacks of September 11th, we can no longer
tolerate policies that fail to protect and control our borders. For the
last decade, Congress has invested millions of dollars to vastly
increase the number of immigration border patrol agents, improve
surveillance technology, and install other controls to strengthen
border enforcement, especially at our southwest border. Yet, almost
everyone will agree that these policies have failed to stop illegal
immigration. The proof is in the numbers--several hundred thousand
people continue to enter the U.S. illegally each year.
Our border enforcement strategy has, in effect, diverted migration
flows to the most inhospitable desert and mountain terrains, causing
dramatic increases in deaths due to exposure to the elements. According
to statistics from the U.S. Border Patrol, since 1998 nearly 2,000
people have died making the treacherous journey across our southern
border. Desperate migrants are being drawn into criminal smuggling
syndicates, increasing the danger of violence to border patrol agents,
border communities, and the migrant themselves. As Stephen Flynn, an
expert on terrorism, noted at a recent Congressional hearing, these
``draconian measures'' have produced chaos at our borders, which
``makes it ideal for exploitation by criminals and terrorists.''
Our borders must be safe and secure. Although no terrorists have been
apprehended crossing the southern border, the conditions there are ripe
for abuse. Our present enforcement policies are not effective. Our bill
will replace the chaotic, deadly illegal crossings along our southwest
border with orderly and safe legal avenues for immigrant workers and
immigrant families. Substantially legalizing the flow of people at our
borders will strengthen our security and substantially reduce criminal
activities, enabling immigration enforcement agents to focus their
resources on terrorists and criminals attempting to enter the country.
The bill will strengthen national security by encouraging undocumented
persons to come forward to become legal.
We have a unique opportunity to reform the current immigration
system, and apply sensible policies that reaffirm our commitment to
family unity, fundamental fairness, economic opportunity, and humane
treatment.
The bill we are introducing today will achieve the full reforms we
need. A good first step would be to enact two bills that are already
pending--the AgJOBS bill to reform the immigration laws for migrant
workers, and the DREAM Act, to enable undocumented high school students
to qualify for legal status so they can attend college. The
Administration's wholehearted endorsements of these two bills would
guarantee their immediate passage. Let's at least get these bills done
now. We cannot afford any more delays.
I look forward to working with my colleagues to reform our
immigration laws. It's time to make these long-overdue reforms happen.
______
By Mr. INOUYE:
S. 2382. A bill to establish grant programs for the development of
telecommunications capacities in Indian country; to the Committee on
Indian Affairs.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill that is long
overdue and much needed in Indian country.
On May 22nd of last year, the Committee on Indian Affairs held a
hearing on the status of telecommunications across Native America.
Testimony received at that hearing and reports of Federal agencies that
were made part of the hearing record indicate that there is most
definitely a vast difference in access to the most basic
telecommunications services.
For instance, telephone service to Indian homes is from 30 to 60
percent less than the national average, and only 10 percent of Indian
homes have Internet service.
The bill that I introduce today is modeled after the community
development block grant program and provides authorization for the
establishment of two block grant programs in the Department of
Commerce. The first block grant would enable tribal governments to
develop the necessary infrastructure
[[Page S4843]]
to support expanded telecommunications capabilities, to develop
comprehensive plans for enhancing telecommunications services in Indian
communities, and to provide support for telemedicine.
The second block grant program would support the provision of
training and technical assistance in the very complex field of
telecommunications.
The objectives of this bill can be rather simply stated. For too
long, when it comes to access to even the most basic telecommunications
services--telephone and Internet access--we have relegated Indian
country to third world status. We must bridge this gap--it is that
fundamental.
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. 2382
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 ``Native American Connectivity
Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1)(A) disparities exist in the areas of education, health
care, workforce training, commerce, and economic activity of
Indians due to the rural nature of most Indian reservations;
and
(B) access to basic and advanced telecommunications
infrastructure is critical in eliminating those disparities;
(2) currently, only 67.9 percent of Indian homes have
telephone service, compared with the national average of 95.1
percent;
(3) the telephone service penetration rate on some
reservations is as low as 39 percent;
(4) even on reservations and trust land, non-Indian homes
are more likely to have telephone service than Indian homes;
(5) only 10 percent of Indian households on tribal land
have Internet access;
(6) only 17 percent of Indian tribes have developed
comprehensive technology plans;
(7) training and technical assistance have been identified
as the most significant needs for the development and
effective use of telecommunications and information
technology in Indian country;
(8) funding for telecommunications and information
technology projects in Indian country remains inadequate to
address the needs of Indian communities;
(9) many Indian tribes are located on or adjacent to Indian
land in which unemployment rates exceed 50 percent;
(10) the lack of telecommunications infrastructure and low
telephone and Internet penetration rates adversely affects
the ability of Indian tribes to pursue economic development
opportunities; and
(11) health care, disease prevention education, and
cultural preservation are greatly enhanced with access to and
use of telecommunications technology and electronic
information.
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to promote affordable and universal access among Indian
tribal governments, tribal entities, and Indian households to
telecommunications and information technology in Indian
country;
(2) to encourage and promote tribal economic development,
self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments;
(3) to enhance the health of Indian tribal members through
the availability and use of telemedicine and telehealth; and
(4) to assist in the retention and preservation of native
languages and cultural traditions.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Block grant.--The term ``block grant'' means a grant
provided under section 5.
(2) Eligible activity.--The term ``eligible activity''
means an activity carried out--
(A) to acquire or lease real property (including licensed
spectrum, water rights, dark fiber, exchanges, and other
related interests) to provide telecommunications services,
facilities, and improvements;
(B) to acquire, construct, reconstruct, or install
telecommunications facilities, sites, or improvements
(including design features), or utilities;
(C) to retain any real property acquired under this Act for
tribal communications purposes;
(D) to pay the non-Federal share required by a Federal
grant program undertaken as part of activities funded under
this Act;
(E) to carry out activities necessary--
(i) to develop a comprehensive telecommunications
development plan; and
(ii) to develop a policy, planning, and management capacity
so that an eligible entity may more rationally and
effectively--
(I) determine the needs of the entity;
(II) set long term and short term goals;
(III) devise programs and activities to meet the goals of
the entity, including, if appropriate, telehealth;
(IV) evaluate the progress of the programs and activities
in meeting the goals; and
(V) carry out management, coordination, and monitoring of
activities necessary for effective planning implementation;
(F) to pay reasonable administrative costs and carrying
charges relating to the planning and execution of
telecommunications development activities, including the
provision of information and resources about the planning and
execution of the activities to residents of areas in which
telecommunications development activities are to be
concentrated;
(G) to increase the capacity of an eligible entity to carry
out telecommunications activities;
(H) to provide assistance to institutions of higher
education that have a demonstrated capacity to carry out
eligible activities;
(I) to enable an eligible entity to facilitate
telecommunications development by--
(i) providing technical assistance, advice, and business
support services (including services for developing business
plans, securing funding, and conducting marketing); and
(ii) providing general support (including peer support
programs and mentoring programs) to Indian tribes in
developing telecommunications projects;
(J) to evaluate eligible activities to ascertain and
promote effective telecommunications and information
technology deployment practices and usages among Indian
tribes; or
(K) to provide research, analysis, data collection, data
organization, and dissemination of information relevant to
telecommunications and information technology in Indian
country for the purpose of promoting effective
telecommunications and information technology deployment
practices and usages among tribes.
(3) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means--
(A) an Indian tribe;
(B) an Indian organization;
(C) a tribal college or university;
(D) an intertribal organization; or
(E) a private or public institution of higher education
acting jointly with an Indian tribe.
(4) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the
meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
(5) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Commerce.
(6) Technical assistance.--The term ``technical
assistance'' means the facilitation of skills and knowledge
in planning, developing, assessing, and administering
eligible activities.
(7) Training and technical assistance grant.--The term
``training and technical assistance grant'' means a grant
provided under section 6.
(8) Tribal college or university.--The term ``tribal
college or university'' has the meaning given the term
``tribally controlled college or university'' in section 2 of
the Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act of
1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801), except that the term also includes an
institution listed in the Equity in Educational Land-Grant
Status Act of 1994 (7 U.S.C. 301 note).
(9) Telehealth.--The term ``telehealth'' means the use of
electronic information and telecommunications technologies to
support long-distance clinical health care, patient and
professional health-related education, public health, and
health administration.
SEC. 5. BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM.
(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
National Telecommunications and Information Administration a
Native American telecommunications block grant program to
provide grants on a competitive basis to eligible entities to
carry out eligible activities under subsection (c).
(b) Block Grants.--The Secretary may provide a block grant
to an eligible entity that submits a block grant application
to the Secretary for approval.
(c) Eligible Activities.--A grant under this section may
only be used for an eligible activity.
(d) Regulations.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall promulgate
regulations establishing specific criteria for the
competition conducted to select eligible entities to receive
grants under this section for each fiscal year.
SEC. 6. TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS.
(a) Notification and Criteria.--The Secretary--
(1) shall provide notice of the availability of training
and technical assistance grants; and
(2) publish criteria for selecting recipients.
(b) Grants.--The Secretary may provide training and
technical assistance grants to eligible entities with a
demonstrated capacity to carry out eligible activities.
(c) Use of Funds.--A training and technical assistance
grant shall be used--
(1) to develop a training program for telecommunications
employees; or
(2) to provide assistance to students who--
(A) participate in telecommunications or information
technology work study programs; and
(B) are enrolled in a full-time graduate or undergraduate
program in telecommunications-related education, development,
planning, or management.
(d) Setaside.--
(1) In general.--For each fiscal year, the Secretary shall
set aside $2,000,000 of the amount made available under
section 12 for training and technical assistance grants, to
remain available until expended.
(2) Treatment.--A training and technical assistance grant
to an entity shall be in addition to any block grant provided
to the entity.
[[Page S4844]]
(e) Provision of Technical Assistance by the Secretary.--
The Secretary may provide technical assistance, directly or
through contracts, to--
(1) tribal governments; and
(2) persons or entities that assist tribal governments.
SEC. 7. COMPLIANCE.
(a) Audit by the Comptroller General.--
(1) In general.--The Comptroller General of the United
States may audit any financial transaction involving grant
funds that is carried out by a block grant recipient or
training and technical assistance grant recipient.
(2) Scope of authority.--In conducting an audit under
paragraph (1), the Comptroller General shall have access to
all books, accounts, records, reports, files, and other
papers, things, or property belonging to or in use by the
grant recipient that relate to the financial transaction and
are necessary to facilitate the audit.
(3) Regulations.--The Comptroller General shall promulgate
regulations to carry out this subsection.
(b) Environmental Protection.--
(1) In general.--After consultation with Indian tribes, the
Secretary may promulgate regulations to carry out this
subsection that--
(A) ensure that the policies of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and other laws
that further the purposes of that Act (as specified by the
regulations), are most effectively implemented in connection
with the expenditure of funds under this Act; and
(B) assure the public of undiminished protection of the
environment.
(2) Substitute measures.--Subject to paragraph (3), the
Secretary may provide for the release of funds under this Act
for eligible activities to grant recipients that assume all
of the responsibilities for environmental review,
decisionmaking, and related action under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.),
and other laws that further the purposes of that Act (as
specified by the regulations promulgated under paragraph
(1)), that would apply to the Secretary if the Secretary
carried out the eligible activities as Federal projects.
(3) Release.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall approve the release of
funds under paragraph (2) only if, at least 15 days prior to
approval, the grant recipient submits to the Secretary a
request for release accompanied by a certification that meets
the requirements of paragraph (4).
(B) Approval.--The approval by the Secretary of a
certification shall be deemed to satisfy the responsibilities
of the Secretary under the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the laws specified by
the regulations promulgated under paragraph (1), to the
extent that those responsibilities relate to the release of
funds for projects described in the certification.
(4) Certification.--A certification shall--
(A) be in a form acceptable to the Secretary;
(B) be executed by the tribal government;
(C) specify that the grant recipient has fully assumed the
responsibilities described in paragraph (2); and
(D) specify that the tribal officer--
(i) assumes the status of a responsible Federal official
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and each law specified by the
regulations promulgated under paragraph (1), to the extent
that the provisions of that Act or law apply; and
(ii) is authorized to consent, and consents, on behalf of
the grant recipient and on behalf of the tribal officer to
accept the jurisdiction of the Federal courts for enforcement
of the responsibilities of the tribal officer as a
responsible Federal official.
SEC. 8. REMEDIES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE.
(a) Failure to Comply.--If the Secretary finds, on the
record after opportunity for an agency hearing, that a block
grant recipient or training and technical assistance grant
recipient has failed to comply substantially with any
provision of this Act, the Secretary, until satisfied that
there is no longer a failure to comply, shall--
(1) terminate payments to the grant recipient;
(2) reduce payments to the grant recipient by an amount
equal to the amount of payments that were not expended in
accordance with this Act;
(3) limit the availability of payments under this Act to
programs, projects, or activities not affected by the failure
to comply; or
(4) refer the matter to the Attorney General with a
recommendation that the Attorney General bring an appropriate
civil action.
(b) Action by the Attorney General.--After a referral by
the Secretary under subsection (a)(4), the Attorney General
may bring a civil action in United States district court for
appropriate relief (including mandatory relief, injunctive
relief, and recovery of the amount of the assistance provided
under this Act that was not expended in accordance with this
Act).
SEC. 9. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
(a) Annual Report to Congress.--Not later than 180 days
after the end of each fiscal year in which assistance under
this Act is provided, the Secretary shall submit to Congress
a report that includes--
(1) a description of the progress made in accomplishing the
objectives of this Act;
(2) a summary of the use of funds under this Act during the
preceding fiscal year; and
(3) an evaluation of the status of telephone, Internet, and
personal computer penetration rates, by type of technology,
among Indian households throughout Indian country on a tribe-
by-tribe basis.
(b) Reports to Secretary.--The Secretary may require grant
recipients under this Act to submit reports and other
information necessary for the Secretary to prepare the report
under subsection (a).
SEC. 10. CONSULTATION.
In carrying out this Act, the Secretary shall consult with
other Federal agencies administering Federal grant programs.
SEC. 11. HISTORIC PRESERVATION REQUIREMENTS.
A telecommunications project funded under this Act shall
comply with the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C.
470 et seq.).
SEC. 12. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated to
carry out this Act--
(1) $20,000,000 for fiscal year 2005; and
(2) such sums as are necessary for each subsequent fiscal
year.
(b) Availability.--Funds made available under subsection
(a) shall remain available until expended.
____________________