[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 72 (Thursday, May 20, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5980-S5983]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. WARNER (for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Roberts, and Mr. 
        Allen):
  S. 2462. A bill to provide additional assistance to recipients of 
Federal Pell Grants who are pursuing programs of study in engineering, 
mathematics, science, or foreign languages; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor and Pensions.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce an important 
bill related to education and our national, homeland, and economic 
security. I am pleased to be joined in this bipartisan effort with 
Senators Lieberman, Roberts, and Allen, and I am grateful to each of 
them for working closely with me in crafting this legislation.
  Some 50 plus years ago, I was a high school drop-out. I left school 
at the age of 17 to enlist in the Navy to serve this country in World 
War II. In the military, I earned the rank of Petty Officer 3rd Class, 
electronic technician's mate. And, it was in this role that I earned my 
first bit of technical education.
  In return for my service, I was lucky enough to earn a GI Bill that 
helped me go to college at Washington & Lee University where I earned a 
degree in engineering. Subsequently, I joined the Marines and earned a 
second GI Bill that allowed me to attend the University of Virginia 
where I earned my law degree.
  Without the GI bill, I certainly might not have earned the education 
that I was fortunate enough to receive, and I certainly would not be 
standing here today in the United States Senate. That is why I feel so 
very strongly that we must support education in this country. Today's 
generation of students should have at least the same opportunity to 
earn their education that I had, if not more.
  We are fortunate in America that we have several important Federal 
programs to help make education more affordable for today's generation. 
Whether it is the GI Bill, the Americorp stipend, subsidized and 
unsubsidized Stafford loans, or any number of other Federal education 
programs, many Americans today who wish to obtain higher education have 
access to a variety of educational programs. I support strengthening 
these programs to increase access to higher education.
  Of all the educational grant programs, the Pell Grant program is the 
largest source of grant aid to help students pay for the costs 
associated with higher education. Eligibility for Pell Grants is based 
on financial need, and this year alone, Pell Grants helped 5.3 million 
undergraduate students attain higher education.
  Now, I am a strong supporter of the Pell Grant program. The $13.1 
billion

[[Page S5981]]

that is being spent by the Federal Government on Pell Grants in fiscal 
year 2004 gives students access to higher education that otherwise 
might not have such access. But, I also recognize that the Pell Grant 
program was created in 1972 when the world was entirely different.
  Our world today is much more dangerous than it was back then, and 
much more dangerous than when I served this country with brief tours of 
duty in World War II and the Korean War.
  Today, while we're sleeping, people in other parts of the world are 
contriving of every possible way to take our business, our economy, our 
security, and our freedoms away from us. September 11, 2001, should 
remind us of this.
  Once, great oceans protected this Nation. But now, with the advent of 
the Internet and other modern technologies, the world is more connected 
than ever, and America is more vulnerable than ever in a lot of ways. 
Computer hackers all over the world try on a daily basis to hack into 
government computers. If successful, this could wreak havoc. 
Furthermore, each day, for whatever reason, people create computer 
viruses, and even the smallest virus can cost our economy billions of 
dollars.
  Simply put, in today's day and age, our country faces new challenges 
like never before. I ask--are we prepared to meet these challenges?
  Unfortunately, our institutions of higher learning are not producing 
enough American graduates with certain majors to meet our new 
challenges. In engineering, math, computer sciences, hard sciences, and 
certain foreign languages--America is coming up short.
  The statistics are alarming: the Third International Math and Science 
Study reports that U.S. 12th graders scored in only the 7th percentile 
in math worldwide, and only the 3rd percentile in science. This is near 
the bottom among major industrialized nations. The National Science 
Foundation reports that the fraction of U.S. Bachelor degrees in 
science and engineering have been declining for nearly 2 decades when 
compared to the rest of the world. While nearly two-thirds of Bachelor 
degrees in China and Singapore are science or engineering, they account 
for only about 17 percent in the United States. In fact, we currently 
rank 61st out of the 63 countries surveyed. Similarly, the National 
Science Board reports that the fraction of foreign born scientists and 
engineers in the U.S. workforce rose to an all time high by 2000. 
Amazingly, 38 percent of all people working in the United States with 
doctorate degrees in science or engineering are now foreign born.
  The effects of these educational trends are already being felt in 
various important ways. For example: the American Physical Society 
reports that the proportion of articles by American authors in the 
Physical Review, one of the most important research journals in the 
world, has hit an all time low of 29 percent, down from 61 percent in 
1983. And the U.S. production of patents, probably the most direct link 
between research and economic benefit, has declined steadily relative 
to the rest of the world for decades, and now stands at only 52 percent 
of the total.
  Despite these statistics, up to now, this country has been able to 
meet its new challenges by importing brain power from foreign 
countries. We are fortunate to have so many smart minds from other 
countries willing to come to the United States to fill critical science 
and engineering positions. However, the need for home-grown talent is 
becoming more and more apparent.
  First, international competition for this foreign brain power has 
become intense. As the National Science Board notes, ``Governments 
throughout the world recognize that a high-skill S&E workforce is 
essential for economic strength. Countries beyond the United States 
have been taking action to . . . attract foreign students and workers, 
and raise the attractiveness to their own citizenry of staying home or 
returning from abroad to serve growing national economies and research 
enterprises.'' This increased global competition for science and 
engineering workers ``comes at a time when demand for their skills is 
projected to rise significantly--both in the United States and 
throughout the global economy.''
  Without action on our part, though, America will lose out in the 
competition for these technically talented workers. According to the 
National Science Board, by 2010, if current trends continue, 
significantly less than 10 percent of all physical scientists and 
engineers in the world will be working in America.
  Increased global competition is not the only reason, though, that we 
have to promote a home-grown S&E workforce in America. In the post 9/11 
era, it is more important than ever from a security perspective to have 
American citizens performing certain tasks.
  The National Science Board put it best when they said, ``The ready 
availability of outstanding science and engineering talent from other 
countries is no longer assured, as international competition for the 
science and engineering workforce grows. Threats to world peace and 
domestic security create additional constraints on employment of 
foreign nationals in the United States.''
  I think the message is clear: Our S&E workforce is in crisis. If we 
do not act to encourage more American citizens to enter the high 
shortage areas in engineering, math, and science, then America may lose 
its historical advantage as the world's innovator.
  The consequences of this trend are also significant from a national 
security perspective. The defense-related research that goes into 
giving our men and women in the Armed Forces the best technology and 
equipment requires the special skills of engineers, scientists and 
computer scientists. Our military has always recognized these facts, 
and historically has been a tremendous supporter of science and 
engineering on a broad scale, from applied research to the most pure 
and esoteric of pursuits.
  Let me quote some numbers which make clear what a huge investment our 
defense community makes in science and engineering: According to the 
National Science Foundation, the Defense Department is by far the 
largest single supporter of science and technology in the Federal 
Government, accounting for about half of the total research dollars 
spent; the proportion of defense funding for University research in 
critical disciplines is very significant. For example, 90 percent of 
basic astronautical research is defense-funded. And, as you all must 
realize, University research is vastly important for training 
subsequent generations of high-quality researchers; and in terms of 
technical manpower, defense-related scientists and engineers make up 
nearly 46 percent of the total Federal workforce. And, this includes 28 
percent of all physical scientists, 48 percent of computer scientists 
and mathematicians, and 67 percent of all engineers.
  For well over a century these investments have given us advantages in 
technological fields that have provided our men and women of our Armed 
Forces the most advanced and powerful tools in existence, from 
submarines and airplanes to unmanned vehicles and the Internet. These 
technologies not only give our military an overwhelming advantage on 
the battlefield, they also save many lives.
  Yet, alarmingly, it is in the precise disciplines that produce these 
technologies and equipment where we see some of the greatest potential 
shortages in our science and engineering workforce. Numerous studies 
show that the number of domestic students in these critical fields has 
been falling steadily for years. And, without major investments to 
encourage more Americans to enter these critical fields, America is 
going to lose its status as the world's innovator and be placed in the 
precarious situation of having to rely on foreign countries to sell us 
the best equipment and the best technology for our troops. That is why 
it is paramount for America, from within, to produce the home-grown 
technical talent it needs.
  The consequences of inaction are enormous. And, while America's 
challenge is substantial, it is not insurmountable. Fortunately, we 
already have an existing Federal program up and running that, if 
modified, can help.
  Under current law, the $13.1 billion a year Pell Grant program awards 
recipients grants regardless of the course of study that the recipient 
chooses to pursue. So, under current law, 2 people

[[Page S5982]]

from the same financial background are eligible for the same grant even 
though one chooses to major in the liberal arts while the other majors 
in engineering or science.
  While I believe studying the liberal arts is an important component 
to having an enlightened citizenry, I also believe that given the 
unique challenges we are facing in this country, it is appropriate for 
us to add an incentive to the Pell Grant program to encourage 
individuals to pursue courses of study where graduates are needed to 
meet our national security, homeland security, and economic security 
needs.
  That is why today I am introducing this legislation. The legislation 
is simple. It provides that at least every 2 years, our Secretary of 
Education, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary 
of Homeland Security, and others, should provide a list of courses of 
study where America needs home-grown talent to meet our national, 
homeland, and economic security needs. Those students who pursue 
courses of study in these programs will be rewarded through a doubling 
of their Pell Grant to help them with the costs associated with 
obtaining their education.
  We in the Congress have an obligation when expending taxpayer money, 
to do so in a manner that meets our Nation's needs. Our Nation 
desperately needs more highly trained domestic workers. That is an 
indisputable fact. And, in the Pell Grant program, we have over $13 
billion that is readily available to help meet this demand.
  In closing, our world is vastly different today than it was when the 
Pell Grant program was created in 1972. My legislation is a commonsense 
modification of the Pell Grant program that will help America meet its 
new challenges. I hope my colleagues will join me in this endeavor.
  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. 2462

       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 ``21st Century Federal Pell 
     Grant Plus Act''.

     SEC. 2. RECIPIENTS OF FEDERAL PELL GRANTS WHO ARE PURSUING 
                   PROGRAMS OF STUDY IN ENGINEERING, MATHEMATICS, 
                   SCIENCE, OR FOREIGN LANGUAGES.

       Section 401(b)(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1070a(b)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(C)(i) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) and subject to 
     clause (iii), in the case of a student who is eligible under 
     this part and who is pursuing a degree with a major in, or a 
     certificate or program of study relating to, engineering, 
     mathematics, science (such as physics, chemistry, or computer 
     science), or a foreign language, described in a list 
     developed or updated under clause (ii), the amount of the 
     Federal Pell Grant shall be the amount calculated for the 
     student under subparagraph (A) for the academic year 
     involved, multiplied by 2.
       ``(ii)(I) The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary 
     of Defense, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland 
     Security, and the Director of the National Science 
     Foundation, shall develop, update not less than once every 2 
     years, and publish in the Federal Register, a list of 
     engineering, mathematics, and science degrees, majors, 
     certificates, or programs that if pursued by a student, may 
     enable the student to receive the increased Federal Pell 
     Grant amount under clause (i). In developing and updating the 
     list the Secretaries and Director shall consider the 
     following:
       ``(aa) The current engineering, mathematics, and science 
     needs of the United States with respect to national security, 
     homeland security, and economic security.
       ``(bb) Whether institutions of higher education in the 
     United States are currently producing enough graduates with 
     degrees to meet the national security, homeland security, and 
     economic security needs of the United States.
       ``(cc) The future expected workforce needs of the United 
     States required to help ensure the Nation's national 
     security, homeland security, and economic security.
       ``(dd) Whether institutions of higher education in the 
     United States are expected to produce enough graduates with 
     degrees to meet the future national security, homeland 
     security, and economic security needs of the United States.
       ``(II) The Secretary, in consultation with the Secretary of 
     Defense, the Secretary of the Department of Homeland 
     Security, and the Secretary of State, shall develop, update 
     not less than once every 2 years, and publish in the Federal 
     Register, a list of foreign language degrees, majors, 
     certificates, or programs that if pursued by a student, may 
     enable the student to receive the increased Federal Pell 
     Grant amount under clause (i). In developing and updating the 
     list the Secretaries shall consider the following:
       ``(aa) The foreign language needs of the United States with 
     respect to national security, homeland security, and economic 
     security.
       ``(bb) Whether institutions of higher education in the 
     United States are currently producing enough graduates with 
     degrees to meet the national security, homeland security, and 
     economic security needs of the United States.
       ``(cc) The future expected workforce needs of the United 
     States required to help ensure the Nation's national 
     security, homeland security, and economic security.
       ``(dd) Whether institutions of higher education in the 
     United States are expected to produce enough graduates with 
     degrees to meet the future national security, homeland 
     security, and economic security needs of the United States.
       ``(iii) Each student who received an increased Federal Pell 
     Grant amount under clause (i) to pursue a degree, major, 
     certificate, or program described in a list published under 
     subclause (I) or (II) of clause (ii) shall continue to be 
     eligible for the increased Federal Pell Grant amount in 
     subsequent academic years if the degree, major, certificate, 
     or program, respectively, is subsequently removed from the 
     list.
       ``(iv)(I) If a student who received an increased Federal 
     Pell Grant amount under clause (i) changes the student's 
     course of study to a degree, major, certificate, or program 
     that is not included in a list described in clause (ii), then 
     the Secretary shall reduce the amount of Federal Pell Grant 
     assistance the student is eligible to receive under this 
     section for subsequent academic years by an amount equal to 
     the difference between the total amount the student received 
     under this subparagraph and the total amount the student 
     would have received under this section if this subparagraph 
     had not been applied.
       ``(II) The Secretary shall reduce the amount of Federal 
     Pell Grant assistance the student is eligible to receive in 
     subsequent academic years by dividing the total amount to be 
     reduced under subclause (I) for the student by the number of 
     years the student received an increased Federal Pell Grant 
     amount under clause (i), and deducting the result from the 
     amount of Federal Pell Grant assistance the student is 
     eligible to receive under this section for a number of 
     subsequent academic years equal to the number of academic 
     years the student received an increased Federal Pell Grant 
     amount under clause (i).''.

  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to join my esteemed 
colleague from the State of Virginia, Senator Warner, in introducing 
The 21st Century Pell Grant Plus Act. This bill is intended to provide 
an immediate and direct response to the urgent need in this country to 
encourage greater numbers of graduates in the critical areas of math 
and science and foreign language. Specifically, our bill would provide 
financial incentives to American college students, via enhanced Pell 
grants, to pursue degrees in science, engineering, mathematics, and key 
foreign languages. These subject areas are critical for meeting our 
nation's economic and homeland security needs.
  Although the number of jobs requiring scientific and technical skills 
is projected to grow over the next decade, the last ten years have 
witnessed a significant decline in the number of relevant baccalaureate 
degrees awarded by U.S. institutions of higher education. Recent 
reports have highlighted the decline in science and engineering 
graduates in our country, which has threatened the United States' 
worldwide dominance in science and innovation. Foreign advances in 
basic science now often exceed those in the United States. To 
exacerbate the matter, future demographics signal that many of the 
presently employed engineers and scientists who entered the workforce 
in the 1960s and 1970s will retire during the next decade. 
Unfortunately, their children are not following them into the same 
professions.
  Many of our competitors in the world market are not experiencing 
these same problems. The universities in some European and Asian 
countries are attracting science and engineering majors at much higher 
rates than the universities in the United States. For example, China 
graduated three times as many engineering graduates than the United 
States did in 1999. In 2000, there were 24 nations who awarded a higher 
percentage of science and engineering degrees than the United States 
did. In that same year, the percentage of students earning science 
degrees in Finland was 2.5 times higher than in the United States. 
Graduate education trends are no better. According to National Science 
Foundation indicators,

[[Page S5983]]

between 1986 and 1999, China produced science and engineering 
doctorates at an average annual growth rate of 36.5 percent. By 
comparison, the United States had an average annual growth rate of just 
2.2 percent during the same period. We must also keep in mind that of 
all the science and engineering doctoral degrees earned in the United 
States in 1999, 48.6 percent of them were earned by non-U.S. citizens.
  I noted in my recent offshore outsourcing study, now posted on my 
website, that as global competition for technical talent intensifies, 
our economic security depends on producing U.S.-born science and 
engineering graduates. Not being able to fill the jobs in this country 
with U.S. citizens is also a threat to our national security. Thus, it 
is imperative that our higher education system, which is the best in 
the world, train more individuals in science and technology.
  Our bill provides a simple and efficient solution to this problem. 
Under our proposal, any student who qualifies for a Pell Grant and 
majors in science, engineering, mathematics, or certain foreign 
languages would be eligible to receive a grant that is double the size 
of the original award. Every two years the Secretary of Education, in 
consultation with the Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security, and 
the director of the National Science Foundation will develop a list of 
engineering, mathematics, science, and foreign language majors, 
degrees, certificates, or programs that if pursued by a student, may 
enable that student to receive the increased Federal Pell Grant amount.
  Science, engineering, technology, and innovation are key to our 
economic growth, prosperity, and security. The 21st Century Federal 
Pell Grant Plus Act aims to strengthen our technical workforce, and 
thus our economic and homeland security, by encouraging more of our 
college students to study science, engineering, mathematics, and 
foreign languages. I urge my colleagues to act favorably on this 
measure.
  I would also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to a man 
who some have appropriately described as a true gentleman as well as an 
outstanding leader in engineering and science. Dr. John H. Hopps died 
on May 14, 2004 at 65 years of age. He has advised my office on our 
nation's science talent issues for the past three years, and I want to 
dedicate today's new bill to him. At the time of his death, he was 
serving as Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Research and National 
Laboratories, and Deputy Director of Defense Research and Engineering. 
He accepted this dual position out of a strong sense of national 
service after the September 11 attack. The science community has lost a 
member who has served as an inspiration to many, including members of 
my staff, for his commitment to his profession and his unique 
approaches to developing our technical workforce. Among his many 
achievements, including many in University education and at NSF, I 
would note that Dr. Hopps was the author of numerous scholarly and 
scientific papers, and was recognized as one of the top African 
Americans in Technology in 2004. I might also mention that in addition 
to his intellectual prowess, he was passionate about athletics--a 
winning combination. As we introduce this bill to highlight the 
importance of this profession, I thought it was appropriate to 
recognize Dr. Hopps, and thank my colleagues for this opportunity.
                                 ______