[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 108 (Monday, September 13, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S9131-S9141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Ms. COLLINS:
S. 2792. A bill to permit athletes to receive nonimmigrant status
under certain conditions, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to
address the inability of promising, talented young athletes from other
countries to play for sports teams in the United States, such as the
MAINEiacs, a junior league hockey team in Lewiston, ME. This year's
shortage of H-2B nonimmigrant visas for temporary or seasonal
nonagricultural foreign workers is a matter of great concern to me and
to many in my home State of Maine. In early March, the U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services announced that the congressionally mandated
cap of 66,000 H-2B visas would soon be met. It immediately stopped
accepting applications for these visas. This meant that thousands of
employers in Maine and across the United States who rely on the H-2B
program have been in a very difficult position this summer.
For example, Maine's tourism and hospitality industry, as well as its
forest products industry, have been particularly hard-pressed to find
enough American workers to keep their businesses running at normal
levels during what is their busiest time of year. What many people do
not know, however, is that the H-2B visa shortage has also meant that
hundreds of promising athletes have been unable to come to the United
States to play for minor league and amateur sports teams across the
Nation.
Those affected by the H-2B problem are not confined to just one
industry or one State. That is why I cosponsored two pieces of
legislation that would immediately address this problem: S. 2252, the
Save the Summer Act, introduced by Senator Kennedy, and S. 2258, the
Summer Operations and Services (SOS) Relief and Reform Act, introduced
by Senators Hatch and Chambliss. The former would increase the H-2B
visa cap by 40,000 this fiscal year, while the
[[Page S9132]]
latter would exclude from the cap returning foreign workers who were
counted against the cap within the past 2 years. It has become clear,
however, that until this legislation comes before the full Senate for a
vote, we must continue to actively seek alternative solutions to this
problem.
One issue we must address is the problem facing the many minor league
professional teams, as well as junior league hockey teams, that rely on
H-2B visas. Without these visas, sports teams in Maine and across the
Nation have been unable to bring some of their most talented prospects
to the United States. Major League sports have also lost a traditional
source of talent for their teams.
In my home State of Maine, for example, the Lewiston MAINEiacs, a
Canadian junior hockey league team, has been unable to obtain the H-2b
visas necessary for the majority of its players to remain in the United
States to play in the team's first home games this September. Although
these players range in age from 16 to 20, the majority of them are
between 16 and 18 years old and are required during the hockey season
to balance the demands of athletics and academics. These scholar-
athletes are among Canada's most talented junior players, but due to
the shortage of H-2B visas, they are in danger of missing out on a
tremendous opportunity to improve their skills and, possibly, graduate
to a career in professional hockey. In addition, for each home game
that the team must cancel or reschedule, the economic impact on the
city of Lewiston, and nearby Auburn, in terms of lost hotel and
restaurant revenue will be considerable.
The Portland Sea Dogs, a Double-A level baseball team affiliated with
the Boston Red Sox, also relies on H-2B visas to bring several of its
most skilled players to the United States. Thousands of fans come out
each year to see this team, and others like it across the country, play
what is arguably one of America's favorite sports. This year, however,
approximately 300 talented young, foreign baseball players have been
prevented from coming to the U.S. to play for minor league teams, a
proving ground for athletes hoping to make it to the Major Leagues.
The P-1 nonimmigrant visa is used by athletes who are deemed by the
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services as performing at an
``internationally recognized level of performance.'' Unfortunately,
USCIS has interpreted this visa category to exclude these talented
minor and amateur league athletes. This visa is typically reserved for
only those athletes who have already been promoted to Major League
sports. However, none of these promising athletes is likely to earn a
Major League contract if the players are not first permitted to hone
their skills, and to prove themselves, in the minor leagues. This
problem can easily be solved by expanding the P-1 visa category to
include minor league athletes, as well as those amateur-level athletes,
like the Lewiston MAINEiacs, who have demonstrated a significant
likelihood of graduating to the major leagues.
I have received a letter from officials from Major League Baseball,
which strongly supports the expansion of the P-1 visa category to
include professional minor league baseball players. I ask unanimous
consent to print this letter in the Record. As the League points out,
by making P-1 visas available to this group of athletes, teams would be
able to make player development decisions based on the talent of its
players, without being constrained by visa quotas. The P-1 category,
the League argues, is appropriate for minor league players because
these are the players that the Major League Clubs have selected as some
of the best baseball prospects in the world.
There is no question that Americans are passionate about sports. We
have high expectations for our teams, and demand only the best from our
athletes. By expanding the P-1 visa category, we will make it possible
for athletes to be selected based on talent and skill, rather than
nationality. I ask that we act quickly to amend the law to make this
possible.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
Major League Baseball,
Office of the Commissioner,
July 22, 2004.
Re Legislation for Nonimmigrant Alien Status for Certain
Athletes.
Hon. Susan M. Collins,
U.S. Senator from Maine, Russell Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Collins: I write to express Major League
Baseball's support for your efforts on behalf of Minor League
professional baseball players. We understand that you are
considering sponsoring legislation that will enable Minor
League players to obtain P-1 work visas to perform in the
United States.
Currently, foreign players under Minor League contracts are
required to obtain H-2B (temporary worker) work visas to
perform in the United States. The United States Citizenship
and Immigration Services stopped accepting H-2B visa
applications in March this year, citing the nationwide cap in
the number of such visas that can be issued. That action has
prevented approximately 300 young baseball players from
performing in the Minor Leagues in the United States this
season and developing their skills in the hopes of becoming
Major League players.
Minor League experience is crucial in developing the best
possible Major League players. Unlike other professional
athletes, baseball players almost invariably cannot go
directly from high school or college to the Major Leagues.
Almost all need substantial experience in the Minor Leagues
to develop their talents and skills to Major League quality.
To get that necessary experience, young players are signed by
Major League Clubs and assigned to play for Minor League
affiliates throughout the United States, such as the Eastern
League's Portland Sea Dogs in your state.
The Major League Clubs are currently able to use only 81%
of the H-2B visas the Department of Labor allowed them for
this season, because current laws prevented them from making
decisions in the late spring and throughout the summer to
promote foreign prospects to United States affiliates. Major
League Clubs sign players from the Dominican Republic and
Venezuela and assign them at first to affiliates in those
countries, then seek to promote them to affiliates in the
United States as players' skills progress. Typically, a Club
would seek to promote 3-5 players per season to Minor League
affiliates in the United States, but the visa restrictions
this year have made those promotions impossible. We have
learned that at least several Clubs shied away from drafting
foreign (mostly Canadian) players whom they otherwise might
have selected in the annual First-Year Player Draft in June,
because those Clubs knew there would be no opportunity for
those players to begin their professional careers in the
United States this season. For the Canadian players who were
drafted this past June, signings have declined 80% from 2003.
These results of the current visa laws have deprived Minor
League fans across America from seeing the best young players
possible perform for affiliates of the Major League Baseball
Clubs and have affected the quality and attractiveness of
those affiliates.
Under your leadership, congressional legislation could, by
sensibly making available P-1 visas to professional Minor
League athletes, ensure that the best baseball prospects from
around the world will get the opportunity to develop here in
the United States, without the constraint that the H-2B visa
cap imposes. The National Association of Professional
Baseball Leagues, Inc., also known as Minor League Baseball,
shares our support of your legislation. The Major League
Baseball Players Association also supports allowing the best
young players to develop here in the United States.
Major League Baseball hopes that your Senate colleagues
will follow your leadership and pursue a legislative remedy
to a problem that is threatening to weaken Baseball's Minor
League system.
Sincerely,
Richard L. Alderson,
Executive Vice President,
Baseball Operations.
______
By Mr. SANTORUM:
S. 2793. A bill to remove civil liability barriers that discourage
the donation of fire equipment to volunteer fire companies; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Good
Samaritan Volunteer Firefighter Assistance Act of 2004.'' On September
11, 2001, the Nation witnessed the tragic loss of hundreds of heroic
firefighters. Amazingly, every year quality firefighting equipment
worth millions of dollars is wasted. In order to avoid civil liability
lawsuits, heavy industry and wealthier fire departments destroy surplus
equipment, including hoses, fire trucks, protective gear and breathing
apparatus, instead of donating it to volunteer fire departments.
The basic purpose of this legislation is to induce donations of
surplus firefighting equipment by reducing the threat of civil
liability for organizations, most commonly heavy industry, and
individuals who wish to make these donations. The bill eliminates civil
liability barriers to donations of surplus firefighting equipment by
raising the liability standard for donors from ``negligence'' to
``gross negligence.''
[[Page S9133]]
The ``Good Samaritan Volunteer Firefighter Assistance Act of 2004''
is modeled after a bill passed by the Texas State legislature in 1997
and signed into law by then-Governor George W. Bush which has resulted
in more than $6 million in additional equipment donations from
companies and other fire departments for volunteer departments which
may not be as well equipped. Now companies in Texas can donate surplus
equipment to the Texas Forest Service, which then certifies the
equipment and passes it on to volunteer fire departments that are in
need. The donated equipment must meet all original specifications
before it can be sent to volunteer departments. Arizona, Missouri,
Indiana, and South Carolina have passed similar legislation at the
state level.
The legislation saves taxpayer dollars by encouraging donations,
thereby reducing the taxpayers' burden of purchasing expensive
equipment for volunteer fire departments. in the 107th Congress,
Representative Castle introduced the Good Samaritan Volunteer
Firefighter Assistance Act which had 104 bipartisan cosponsors in the
House of Representatives. It is also supported by the National
Volunteer Fire Council, the Firemen's Association of the State of New
York, and a former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), James Lee Witt. The bill has been reintroduced as H.R. 1787 in
the 108th Congress.
This bill does not cost taxpayer dollars nor does it create
additional bureaucracies to inspect equipment. The bill eliminates
unnecessary inspection bureaucracies. This is for three reasons. First,
bureaucracies are not necessary for inspections because the fire chiefs
make the inspections themselves. Second, some of the State
bureaucracies control who gets the equipment. These donations are
private property transactions, not a good that is donated to the State,
allowing the State to pick who will get the equipment. Third, there is
no desire to create the temptation for waste, fraud, and abuse in a
State bureaucracy in charge of picking winners and losers.
The bill reflects the purpose of the Texas State law. Federally,
precedent for similar measures includes the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan
Food Act (Public Law 104-210), named for the late Representative Bill
Emerson, which encourages restaurants, hotels and businesses to donate
millions of dollars worth of food. The Volunteer Protection Act of 1997
(Public Law 105-101) also immunizes individuals who do volunteer work
for non-profit organizations or governmental entities from liability
for ordinary negligence in the course of their volunteer work. I have
also previously introduced three Good Samaritan measures in the 106th
Congress, S. 843, S. 844 and S. 845. These provisions were also
included in a broader charitable package in S. 997, the Charity
Empowerment Act, to provide additional incentives for corporate in-kind
charitable contributions for motor vehicle, aircraft, and facility use.
The same provision passed the House of Representatives in the 107th
Congress as part of H.R. 7, the Community Solutions Act, in July of
2001, but was not signed into law.
Volunteers comprise approximately 73 percent of firefighters in the
United States. Of the total estimated 1,078,300 firefighters across the
country, 784,700 are volunteer. Of the more than 30,000 fire
departments in the country, approximately 22,600 are all volunteer;
4,800 are mostly volunteer; 1,600 are mostly career; and 2,000 are all
career. In 2000, 58 of the 103 firefighters who died in the line of
duty were volunteers.
This legislation provides a commonsense incentive for additional
contributions to volunteer fire departments around the country and
would make it more attractive for corporations to give equipment to
fire departments in other states. All of America has witnessed the
heroic acts of selflessness and sacrifice of firefighters in New York
City and in the Washington, D.C. area. I urge my colleagues to join me
in supporting this incentive for the provision of additional safety
equipment for volunteer firefighters who put their lives on the line
every day throughout this great nation.
______
By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Harkin, Ms. Mikulski,
Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Reed, and Mrs. Clinton):
S. 2794. A bill to improve elementary and secondary education; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I'm pleased to join my colleagues to
introduce the No Child Left Behind Improvement Act. Our goal is to
chart a better course for bringing the reforms under the law to all
students across the country.
I was proud to stand with President Bush in January 2002 as he signed
the No Child Left Behind Act into law. At that time, Republicans and
Democrats came together to recognize the need to create a strong
education system where every child attends a good school with a good
teacher. Together, we recognized the importance of achieving that goal
for the future of our democracy, economy, and national defense.
In drafting the No Child Left Behind Act in a bipartisan manner, we
made great progress from the days when Democrats and Republicans were
light years apart on school reform, with some trying to abolish the
U.S. Department of Education and privatize our public schools.
No Child Left Behind made improving our public schools a national
priority. It laid the cornerstone for a solid accountability system in
every State. It called for high academic standards in reading, math,
and science, and high-quality tests to measure progress toward those
standards. For the first time, it placed our low-income children,
children with disabilities, minority children, and English language
learners at the top of the school reform agenda. No longer would their
needs be hidden, overlooked, or ignored.
It also provided the building blocks for quality in all schools. A
fully-qualified teacher in every classroom and better teacher training
to make it happen. More after-school tutoring and supplemental services
to help students with the greatest needs. Special programs for English
language learners. Expanded support for reading in early grades. School
report cards to provide information to parents and motivate them to be
part of their children's education.
No Child Left Behind promised a great deal to our students and to
their families. It's still the right promise. But it hasn't been kept.
Since the law passed, the country has seen the promise of funding No
Child Left Behind flagrantly broken by the Bush administration, time
and time again. President Bush proposed to cut funding for the law by
$90 million just 1 month after signing the bill. His next education
budget cut funding by far more--$1.2 billion.
Today, he's leaving 4.6 million children behind, and he's
underfunding the law by $9.4 billion. At the same time, President Bush
proposes to give tax breaks for the top 1 percent of Americans that
total five times the funds promised but never delivered under the No
Child Left Behind Act.
Despite these broken promises, our schools are trying to do their
part. They've been asked to help all students reach proficiency, and
they are responding. Teachers and other school professionals are
beginning the hard work of tackling disparities in student achievement,
and putting into place the curriculum needed to turn-around thousands
of schools that have been identified as needing improvement.
School leaders are struggling to respond to the challenges of
providing more highly qualified teachers, supplemental services, and
after-school programs in school districts. They're laboring hard in
their work to implement the No Child Left Behind Act and bring the
promise of true reform to more children and their parents.
The work of school reform is not easy, and schools are struggling to
succeed under No Child Left Behind. But on top of the broken promise to
provide schools the resources they need to get the job done right, the
administration has undermined the efforts of schools to comply with the
law, and crippled reforms through its ineffective implementation
effort.
Since No Child Left Behind passed, the Department of Education's
track record in issuing basic guidance under the law been mired in
delay. Final accountability guidelines for children with special needs
and limited English
[[Page S9134]]
proficient children were announced 2 years after the law was enacted,
and long after the law's accountability requirements were already in
place for schools.
The administration has abandoned requirements to measure adequately
the progress of English language learners in a valid and reliable way.
They've suggested to States that they don't have to bother to develop
native language assessments, and they've done nothing to help improve
assessments for children with disabilities.
They've ignored standards for supplemental service providers, and
failed to enforce the civil rights protections that are so essential to
providing all children fair access to such services. Families are
relying on tutoring and extra support to help their children. But the
administration's guidance actually prohibits States from requiring high
standards for that supplemental support. A highly qualified teacher in
every classroom is good policy. Why shouldn't the same apply for
supplemental services?
The administration's ham-handed implementation of public school
choice has ignored questions of capacity in school districts with
overcrowded classrooms.
And their weakened regulations undermine protections against high
dropout rates--especially for low-income and minority students. Without
information and reporting of those rates for each subgroup of children,
the public won't have a complete picture of how children are
succeeding.
It's time for the administration to correct these problems and do
their part to improve implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act.
The bill that I'm introducing today gets these reforms on track. It
will help keep the promise of public school choice, promote quality and
access in supplemental services, provide for better assessments for
children, and ensure better reporting by schools and states of
graduation and dropout rates so that children don't fall through the
cracks.
It's important to acknowledge what this bill does not do. It does not
make fundamental changes to the requirements under No Child Left
Behind. Those reforms are essential to improving our public schools.
Every child deserves a chance to learn in a good school, and that
chance depends on whether we succeed in implementing the law.
The No Child Left Behind Improvement Act will ensure that school
districts consider health and safety codes as they draw up their plans
for providing public school choice to students, consistent with the
law. In order to ensure that public school choice actually helps
children succeed educationally, we must provide an environment that is
safe and conducive to their learning--not overcrowded.
It will provide better access to quality supplemental services for
eligible students, and ensure full enforcement of civil rights
protections under those provisions. The administration's policy of
relaxed enforcement in this area allows some private providers off-the-
hook from serving children that need the most help. That's wrong.
All students should have a fair chance to choose a supplemental
service provider that meets their needs. Limited English proficient
children and children with disabilities are often those students that
need the most extra help and assistance in our public schools, and this
bill would ensure that each State select some providers with the skills
to serve those populations.
This bill will also better enable teachers and para-professionals to
meet the required standards for teacher quality under the law. A highly
qualified teacher is the single most important factor in improving
student achievement, and the No Child Left Behind Act requires that
every classroom have a qualified teacher by 2006.
We must provide for a system that ensures all teachers have the
opportunity to meet that goal. The No Child Left Behind Act includes an
alternate standard for veteran teachers to demonstrate their competence
and be counted as highly qualified in the subject matter that they
teach. This bill ensures that every State develop and implement that
standard under the law, and that every state provide para-professionals
with the opportunities provided under No Child Left Behind to
demonstrate their competence.
Fifteen States have not yet developed or applied standards for
veteran teachers. We must do better especially for the 67 percent of
all public school teachers that have been teaching for more than 5
years.
And finally, for No Child Left Behind's accountability provisions to
be useful, they must be accurate. We need accurate determinations of
whether schools are making progress.
The Department's delay in issuing adequate accountability rules for
counting children with disabilities and limited English proficient
children has created unnecessary confusion, caused a potential
mislabeling of schools, and misdirected resources from the schools and
students who actually need them. The Department should apply those
regulations retroactively, so that schools may be judged on the same
standards for the past year as they will be in the future, not by
different criteria for different years. In June, I introduced a bill--
The No Child Left Behind Fairness Act--to accomplish that goal. The
bill that I'm introducing today also includes those requirements.
We're at an important crossroads in reforming our public schools.
Schools are hurting, crippled by shrinking budgets and a broken promise
of funding under the law. The ineffective track record of this
administration in implementing No Child Left Behind largely has
contributed to their problems and frustrations.
We must do better. Turning our back on the reforms in the No Child
Left Behind Act is no solution. Neither is turning our back on public
education. I urge my colleagues to act to ensure that the promise of
the essential reforms under No Child Left Behind are realized. Our
students and families deserve no less.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2794
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 ``No Child Left Behind
Improvement Act of 2004''.
TITLE I--PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE, SUPPLEMENTAL EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, AND
TEACHER QUALITY
SEC. 101. PUBLIC SCHOOL CHOICE CAPACITY.
(a) School Capacity.--Section 1116(b)(1)(E) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6316(b)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), by striking ``In the case'' and
inserting ``Subject to clauses (ii) and (iii), in the case'';
(2) by redesignating clause (ii) as clause (iii);
(3) by inserting after clause (i) the following:
``(ii) School capacity.--The obligation of a local
educational agency to provide the option to transfer to
students under clause (i) is subject to all applicable State
and local health and safety code requirements regarding
facility capacity.''; and
(4) in clause (iii) (as redesignated by paragraph (2)), by
inserting ``and subject to clause (ii),'' after ``public
school,''.
(b) Grants for School Construction and Renovation.--Subpart
1 of part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 1120C. GRANTS FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION.
``(a) Program Authorized.--From funds appropriated under
subsection (g), the Secretary is authorized to award grants
to local educational agencies experiencing overcrowding in
the schools served by the local educational agencies, for the
construction and renovation of safe, healthy, high-
performance school buildings.
``(b) Application.--Each local educational agency desiring
a grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by
such additional information as the Secretary may require.
``(c) Priority.--In awarding grants under this section, the
Secretary shall give priority to local educational agencies--
``(1) who have documented difficulties in meeting the
public school choice requirements of paragraph (1)(E),
(5)(A), (7)(C)(i), or (8)(A)(i) of section 1116(b), or
section 1116(c)(10)(C)(vii); and
``(2) with the highest number of schools at or above
capacity.
``(d) Award Basis.--From funds remaining after awarding
grants under subsection (c), the Secretary shall award grants
to local educational agencies that are experiencing
overcrowding in the schools served by the local educational
agencies.
``(e) Prevailing Wages.--Any laborer or mechanic employed
by any contractor or
[[Page S9135]]
subcontractor in the performance of work on any construction
funded by a grant awarded under this section will be paid
wages at rates not less than those prevailing on similar
construction in the locality as determined by the Secretary
of Labor under subchapter IV of chapter 31 of title 40,
United States Code (commonly referred to as the Davis-Bacon
Act).
``(f) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) At or above capacity.--The term `at or above
capacity', in reference to a school, means a school in which
1 additional student would increase the average class size of
the school above the average class size of all schools in the
State in which the school is located.
``(2) Healthy, high-performance school building.--The term
`healthy, high-performance school building' has the meaning
given such term in section 5586.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$250,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 2 succeeding fiscal years.''.
SEC. 102. SUPPLEMENTAL EDUCATIONAL SERVICES.
Section 1116(e) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(e)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking the semicolon and
inserting ``, including criteria that--
``(i) ensure that personnel delivering supplemental
educational services to students have adequate
qualifications; and
``(ii) may, at the State's discretion, ensure that
personnel delivering supplemental educational services to
students are teachers that are highly qualified, as such term
is defined in section 9101;'';
(B) in subparagraph (D), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(C) in subparagraph (E), by striking the period and
inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(F) ensure that the list of approved providers of
supplemental educational services described in subparagraph
(C) includes a choice of providers that have sufficient
capacity to provide effective services for children who are
limited English proficient and children with disabilities.'';
(2) in paragraph (5)(C)--
(A) by striking ``applicable''; and
(B) by inserting before the period ``, and acknowledge in
writing that, as an approved provider in the relevant State
educational agency program of providing supplemental
educational services, the provider is deemed to be a
recipient of Federal financial assistance'';
(3) by redesignating paragraphs (6), (7), (8), (9), (10),
(11), and (12) as paragraphs (7), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12),
and (13), respectively;
(4) by inserting after paragraph (5) the following:
``(6) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this section shall
be construed to prohibit a local educational agency from
being considered by a State educational agency as a potential
provider of supplemental educational services under this
subsection, if such local educational agency meets the
criteria adopted by the State educational agency in
accordance with paragraph (5).'';
(5) in paragraph (13) (as redesignated by paragraph (3))--
(A) in subparagraph (B)--
(i) in clause (ii), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(ii) in clause (iii), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(iv) may employ teachers who are highly qualified as such
term is defined in section 9101; and
``(v) pursuant to its inclusion on the relevant State
educational agency's list described in paragraph (4)(C), is
deemed to be a recipient of Federal financial assistance;
and''; and
(B) in subparagraph (C)--
(i) in the matter preceding subclause (i), by striking
``are'';
(ii) in subclause (i)--
(I) by inserting ``are'' before ``in addition''; and
(II) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
(iii) in subclause (ii), by striking the period and
inserting ``; and''; and
(iv) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) if provided by providers that are included on the
relevant State educational agency's list described in
paragraph (4)(C), shall be deemed to be programs or
activities of the relevant State educational agency.''; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
``(14) Civil rights.--In providing supplemental educational
services under this subsection, no State educational agency
or local educational agency may, directly or through
contractual, licensing, or other arrangements with a provider
of supplemental educational services, engage in any form of
discrimination prohibited by--
``(A) title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
``(B) title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972;
``(C) section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973;
``(D) titles II and III of the Americans with Disabilities
Act;
``(E) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975;
``(F) regulations promulgated under the authority of the
laws listed in subparagraphs (A) through (E); or
``(G) other Federal civil rights laws.''.
SEC. 103. QUALIFICATIONS FOR TEACHERS AND PARAPROFESSIONALS.
(a) High Objective Uniform State Standard of Evaluation.--
Section 1119 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 6319) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2)--
(A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) through (C) as
clauses (i) through (iii), respectively, and indenting as
appropriate;
(B) by striking ``(2) State plan.--As part'' and inserting
the following:
``(2) State plan.--
``(A) In general.--As part''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) Availability of state standards.--Each State
educational agency shall make available to teachers in the
State the high objective uniform State standard of
evaluation, as described in section 9101(23)(C)(ii), for the
purpose of meeting the teacher qualification requirements
established under this section.'';
(2) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), (g), (h), (i),
(j), (k), and (l) as subsections (f), (g), (h), (i), (j),
(k), (l), and (m), respectively;
(3) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) State Responsibilities.--Each State educational
agency shall ensure that local educational agencies in the
State make available all options described in subparagraphs
(A) through (C) of subsection (c)(1) to each new or existing
paraprofessional for the purpose of demonstrating the
qualifications of the paraprofessional, consistent with the
requirements of this section.''; and
(4) in subsection (l) (as redesignated in paragraph (2)),
by striking ``subsection (l)'' and inserting ``subsection
(m)''.
(b) Definition of Highly Qualified Teachers.--Section
9101(23)(B)(ii) is amended--
(1) in subclause (I), by striking ``or'' after the
semicolon;
(2) in subclause (II), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(III) in the case of a middle school teacher, passing a
State-approved middle school generalist exam when the teacher
receives a license to teach middle school in the State;
``(IV) obtaining a State middle school or secondary school
social studies certificate that qualifies the teacher to
teach history, geography, economics, civics, and government
in middle schools or in secondary schools, respectively, in
the State; or
``(V) obtaining a State middle school or secondary school
science certificate that qualifies the teacher to teach earth
science, biology, chemistry, and physics in middle schools or
secondary schools, respectively, in the State; and''.
TITLE II--ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS DETERMINATIONS
SEC. 201. REVIEW OF ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS DETERMINATIONS
FOR SCHOOLS FOR THE 2002-2003 SCHOOL YEAR.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall require each local
educational agency to provide each school served by the
agency with an opportunity to request a review of a
determination by the agency that the school did not make
adequate yearly progress for the 2002-2003 school year.
(b) Final Determination.--Not later than 30 days after
receipt of a request by a school for a review under this
section, a local educational agency shall issue and make
publicly available a final determination on whether the
school made adequate yearly progress for the 2002-2003 school
year.
(c) Evidence.--In conducting a review under this section, a
local educational agency shall--
(1) allow the principal of the school involved to submit
evidence on whether the school made adequate yearly progress
for the 2002-2003 school year; and
(2) consider that evidence before making a final
determination under subsection (b).
(d) Standard of Review.--In conducting a review under this
section, a local educational agency shall revise, consistent
with the applicable State plan under section 1111 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311), the local educational agency's original determination
that a school did not make adequate yearly progress for the
2002-2003 school year if the agency finds that the school
made such progress, taking into consideration--
(1) the amendments made to part 200 of title 34, Code of
Federal Regulations (68 Fed. Reg. 68698) (relating to
accountability for the academic achievement of students with
the most significant cognitive disabilities); or
(2) any regulation or guidance that, subsequent to the date
of such original determination, was issued by the Secretary
relating to--
(A) the assessment of limited English proficient children;
(B) the inclusion of limited English proficient children as
part of the subgroup described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II)(dd) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(v)(II)(dd))
after such children have obtained English proficiency; or
(C) any requirement under section 1111(b)(2)(I)(ii) of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(2)(I)(ii)).
(e) Effect of Revised Determination.--
(1) In general.--If pursuant to a review under this section
a local educational agency determines that a school made
adequate
[[Page S9136]]
yearly progress for the 2002-2003 school year, upon such
determination--
(A) any action by the Secretary, the State educational
agency, or the local educational agency that was taken
because of a prior determination that the school did not make
such progress shall be terminated; and
(B) any obligations or actions required of the local
educational agency or the school because of the prior
determination shall cease to be required.
(2) Exceptions.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a
determination under this section shall not affect any
obligation or action required of a local educational agency
or school under the following:
(A) Section 1116(b)(13) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)(13)) (requiring a
local educational agency to continue to permit a child who
transferred to another school under such section to remain in
that school until completion of the highest grade in the
school).
(B) Section 1116(e)(9) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (as redesignated by section 102(3)) (20
U.S.C. 6316(e)(9)) (requiring a local educational agency to
continue to provide supplemental educational services under
such section until the end of the school year).
(3) Subsequent determinations.--In determining whether a
school is subject to school improvement, corrective action,
or restructuring as a result of not making adequate yearly
progress, the Secretary, a State educational agency, or a
local educational agency may not take into account a
determination that the school did not make adequate yearly
progress for the 2002-2003 school year if such determination
was revised under this section and the school received a
final determination of having made adequate yearly progress
for the 2002-2003 school year.
(f) Notification.--The Secretary--
(1) shall require each State educational agency to notify
each school served by the agency of the school's ability to
request a review under this section; and
(2) not later than 30 days after the date of the enactment
of this section, shall notify the public by means of the
Department of Education's website of the review process
established under this section.
SEC. 202. REVIEW OF ADEQUATE YEARLY PROGRESS DETERMINATIONS
FOR LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES FOR THE 2002-
2003 SCHOOL YEAR.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall require each State
educational agency to provide each local educational agency
in the State with an opportunity to request a review of a
determination by the State educational agency that the local
educational agency did not make adequate yearly progress for
the 2002-2003 school year.
(b) Application of Certain Provisions.--Except as
inconsistent with, or inapplicable to, this section, the
provisions of section 201 shall apply to review by a State
educational agency of a determination described in subsection
(a) in the same manner and to the same extent as such
provisions apply to review by a local educational agency of a
determination described in section 201(a).
SEC. 203. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) The term ``adequate yearly progress'' has the meaning
given to that term in section 1111(b)(2)(C) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311(b)(2)(C)).
(2) The term ``local educational agency'' means a local
educational agency (as that term is defined in section 9101
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 7801)) receiving funds under part A of title I of such
Act (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.).
(3) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
Education.
(4) The term ``school'' means an elementary school or a
secondary school (as those terms are defined in section 9101
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 7801)) served under part A of title I of such Act (20
U.S.C. 6311 et seq.).
(5) The term ``State educational agency'' means a State
educational agency (as that term is defined in section 9101
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 7801)) receiving funds under part A of title I of such
Act (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.).
TITLE III--IMPROVING ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
SEC. 301. GRANTS FOR INCREASING DATA CAPACITY FOR PURPOSES OF
ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
(a) Program Authorized.--From funds appropriated under
subsection (g) for a fiscal year, the Secretary may award
grants, on a competitive basis, to State educational
agencies--
(1) to enable the State educational agencies to develop or
increase the capacity of data systems for assessment and
accountability purposes, including the collection of
graduation rates; and
(2) to award subgrants to increase the capacity of local
educational agencies to upgrade, create, or manage
longitudinal data systems for the purpose of measuring
student academic progress and achievement.
(b) State Application.--Each State educational agency
desiring a grant under this section shall submit an
application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner,
and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
(c) State Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency that
receives a grant under this section shall use--
(1) not more than 20 percent of the grant funds for the
purpose of--
(A) increasing the capacity of, or creating, State
databases to collect, disaggregate, and report information
related to student achievement, enrollment, and graduation
rates for assessment and accountability purposes; and
(B) reporting, on an annual basis, for the elementary
schools and secondary schools within the State, on--
(i) the enrollment data from the beginning of the academic
year;
(ii) the enrollment data from the end of the academic year;
and
(iii) the twelfth grade graduation rates; and
(2) not less than 80 percent of the grant funds to award
subgrants to local educational agencies within the State to
enable the local educational agencies to carry out the
authorized activities described in subsection (e).
(d) Local Application.--Each local educational agency
desiring a subgrant under this section shall submit an
application to the State educational agency at such time, in
such manner, and containing such information as the State
educational agency may require. Each such application shall
include, at a minimum, a demonstration of the local
educational agency's ability to put a longitudinal data
system in place.
(e) Local Authorized Activities.--Each local educational
agency that receives a subgrant under this section shall use
the subgrant funds to increase the capacity of the local
educational agency to upgrade or manage longitudinal data
systems consistent with the uses in subsection (c)(1), by--
(1) purchasing database software or hardware;
(2) hiring additional staff for the purpose of managing
such data;
(3) providing professional development or additional
training for such staff; and
(4) providing professional development or training for
principals and teachers on how to effectively use such data
to implement instructional strategies to improve student
achievement and graduation rates.
(f) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) The term ``graduation rate'' means the percentage
that--
(A) the total number of students who--
(i) graduate from a secondary school with a regular diploma
(which shall not include the recognized equivalent of a
secondary school diploma or an alternative degree) in an
academic year; and
(ii) graduated on time by progressing 1 grade per academic
year; represents of
(B) the total number of students who entered the secondary
school in the entry level academic year applicable to the
graduating students.
(2) The terms ``State educational agency'' and ``local
educational agency'' have the meanings given such terms in
section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
(3) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of
Education.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $100,000,000 for
fiscal year 2005, and such sums as may be necessary for each
of the 2 succeeding fiscal years.
SEC. 302. GRANTS FOR ASSESSMENT OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES
AND CHILDREN WHO ARE LIMITED ENGLISH
PROFICIENT.
Part E of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6491 et seq.) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``SEC. 1505. GRANTS FOR ASSESSMENT OF CHILDREN WITH
DISABILITIES AND CHILDREN WHO ARE LIMITED
ENGLISH PROFICIENT.
``(a) Grants Authorized.--From amounts authorized under
subsection (e) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall award
grants, on a competitive basis, to State educational
agencies, or to consortia of State educational agencies, to
enable the State educational agencies or consortia to
collaborate with institutions of higher education, research
institutions, or other organizations--
``(1) to design and improve State academic assessments for
students who are limited English proficient and students with
disabilities; and
``(2) to ensure the most accurate, valid, and reliable
means to assess academic content standards and student
academic achievement standards for students who are limited
English proficient and students with disabilities.
``(b) Authorized Activities.--A State educational agency or
consortium that receives a grant under this section shall use
the grant funds to carry out 1 or more of the following
activities:
``(1) Developing alternate assessments for students with
disabilities, consistent with section 1111 and the amendments
made on December 9, 2003, to part 200 of title 34, Code of
Federal Regulations (68 Fed. Reg. 68698) (relating to
accountability for the academic achievement of students with
the most significant cognitive disabilities), including--
``(A) the alignment of such assessments, as appropriate and
consistent with such amendments, with--
``(i) State academic achievement standards and State
academic content standards for all students; or
``(ii) alternate State academic achievement standards that
reflect the intended instructional construct for students
with disabilities;
[[Page S9137]]
``(B) activities to ensure that such assessments do not
reflect the disabilities, or associated characteristics, of
the students that are extraneous to the intent of the
measurement;
``(C) the development of an implementation plan for pilot
tests for such assessments, in order to determine the level
of appropriateness and feasibility of full-scale
administration; and
``(D) activities that provide for the retention of all
feasible standardized features in the alternate assessments.
``(2) Developing alternate assessments that meet the
requirements of section 1111 for students who are limited
English proficient, including--
``(A) the alignment of such assessments with State academic
achievement standards and State academic content standards
for all students;
``(B) the development of parallel native language
assessments or linguistically modified assessments for
limited English proficient students that meet the
requirements of section 1111(b)(3)(C)(ix)(III);
``(C) the development of an implementation plan for pilot
tests for such assessments, in order to determine the level
of appropriateness and feasibility of full-scale
administration; and
``(D) activities that provide for the retention of all
feasible standardized features in the alternate assessments.
``(3) Developing, modifying, or revising State policies and
criteria for appropriate accommodations to ensure the full
participation of students who are limited English proficient
and students with disabilities in State academic assessments,
including--
``(A) developing a plan to ensure that assessments provided
with accommodations are fully included and integrated into
the accountability system, for the purpose of making the
determinations of adequate yearly progress required under
section 1116;
``(B) ensuring the validity, reliability, and
appropriateness of such accommodations, such as--
``(i) a modification to the presentation or format of the
assessment;
``(ii) the use of assistive devices;
``(iii) an extension of the time allowed for testing;
``(iv) an alteration of the test setting or procedures;
``(v) the administration of portions of the test in a
method appropriate for the level of language proficiency of
the test taker;
``(vi) the use of a glossary or dictionary; and
``(vii) the use of a linguistically modified assessment;
``(C) ensuring that State policies and criteria for
appropriate accommodations take into account the form or
program of instruction provided to students, including the
level of difficulty, reliability, cultural difference, and
content equivalence of such form or program;
``(D) ensuring that such policies are consistent with the
standards prepared by the Joint Committee on Standards for
Educational and Psychological Testing of the American
Educational Research Association, the American Psychological
Association, and the National Council on Measurement in
Education; and
``(E) developing a plan for providing training on the use
of accommodations to school instructional staff, families,
students, and other appropriate parties.
``(4) Developing universally designed assessments that can
be accessible to all students, including--
``(A) examining test item or test performance for students
with disabilities and students who are limited English
proficient, to determine the extent to which the test item or
test is universally designed;
``(B) using think aloud and cognitive laboratory
procedures, as well as item statistics, to identify test
items that may pose particular problems for students with
disabilities or students who are limited English proficient;
``(C) developing and implementing a plan to ensure that
developers and reviewers of test items are trained in the
principles of universal design; and
``(D) developing computer-based applications of universal
design principles.
``(c) Application.--Each State educational agency, or
consortium of State educational agencies, desiring to apply
for a grant under this section shall submit an application to
the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing
such information as the Secretary may require, including--
``(1) information regarding the institutions of higher
education, research institutions, or other organizations that
are collaborating with the State educational agency or
consortium, in accordance with subsection (a);
``(2) in the case of a consortium of State educational
agencies, the designation of 1 State educational agency as
the fiscal agent for the receipt of grant funds;
``(3) a description of the process and criteria by which
the State educational agency will identify students that are
unable to participate in general State content assessments
and are eligible to take alternate assessments, consistent
with the amendments made to part 200 of title 34, Code of
Federal Regulations (68 Fed. Reg. 68698);
``(4) in the case of a State educational agency or
consortium carrying out the activity described in subsection
(b)(1)(A), a description of how the State educational agency
plans to fulfill the requirement of subsection (b)(1)(A);
``(5) in the case of a State educational agency or
consortium carrying out the activities described in
paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) of subsection (b), information
regarding the proposed techniques for the development of
alternate assessments, including a description of the
technical adequacy of, technical aspects of, and scoring for,
such assessments;
``(6) a plan for providing training for school
instructional staff, families, students, and other
appropriate parties on the use of alternate assessments; and
``(7) information on how the scores of students
participating in alternate assessments will be reported to
the public and to parents.
``(d) Evaluation and Reporting Requirements.--Each State
educational agency receiving a grant under this section shall
submit an annual report to the Secretary describing the
activities carried out under the grant and the result of such
activities, including--
``(1) details on the effectiveness of the activities
supported under this section in helping students with
disabilities, or students who are limited English proficient,
better participate in State assessment programs; and
``(2) information on the change in achievement, if any, of
students with disabilities and students who are limited
English proficient, as a result of a more accurate assessment
of such students.
``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section
$50,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 2 succeeding fiscal years.''.
SEC. 303. REPORTS ON STUDENT ENROLLMENT AND GRADUATION RATES.
Part E of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (as amended by section 302) (20 U.S.C. 6491 et
seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 1506. REPORTS ON STUDENT ENROLLMENT AND GRADUATION
RATES.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary of Education shall collect
from each State educational agency, local educational agency,
and school, on an annual basis, the following data:
``(1) The number of students enrolled in each of grades 7
through 12 at the beginning of the most recent school year.
``(2) The number of students enrolled in each of grades 7
through 12 at the end of the most recent school year.
``(3) The graduation rate for the most recent school year.
``(4) The data described in paragraphs (1) through (3),
disaggregated by the groups of students described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II).
``(b) Annual Report.--The Secretary shall report the
information collected under subsection (a) on an annual
basis.''.
TITLE IV--CIVIL RIGHTS
SEC. 401. CIVIL RIGHTS.
Section 9534 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7914) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (a) and (b) as subsections
(b) and (c), respectively; and
(2) by inserting before subsection (b) (as redesignated by
paragraph (1)) the following:
``(a) Prohibition of Discrimination.--Discrimination on the
basis of race, color, religion, sex (except as otherwise
permitted under Title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972), national origin, or disability in any program funded
under this Act is prohibited.''.
TITLE V--TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
SEC. 501. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
Part F of title IX of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7941) is amended--
(1) in the part heading, by inserting ``AND TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE'' after ``EVALUATIONS''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 9602. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
``The Secretary shall ensure that the technical assistance
provided by, and the research developed and disseminated
through, the Institute of Education Sciences and other
offices or agencies of the Department provide educators and
parents with the needed information and support for
identifying and using educational strategies, programs, and
practices, including strategies, programs, and practices
available through the clearinghouses supported under the
Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (20 U.S.C. 9501 et
seq.) and other Federally-supported clearinghouses, that have
been successful in improving educational opportunities and
achievement for all students.''.
______
By Mr. ENZI (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Alexander, Mrs. Dole,
and Mr. Lieberman):
S. 2795. A bill to provide for higher education affordability,
access, and opportunity; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor,
and Pensions.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Higher
Education Affordability, Access and Opportunity Act of 2004 with my
colleagues Senators Baucus, Alexander, Dole and Lieberman.
We are introducing this bipartisan legislation because we are aware
that the American workforce is in the midst
[[Page S9138]]
of its most significant changes since the 1940s. In the past year, this
economy has created nearly 1.7 million new jobs, yet the complaint from
employers continues to be that they cannot find skilled workers to fill
the jobs that are being created. Our educational systems must recognize
this changing reality and be ready to provide the support for a new
group of students that represents a workforce revolution.
This skills gap promises to get worse unless Congress acts now to
provide the assistance necessary to train a generation of workers that
will fill the jobs of tomorrow. The Department of Labor has estimated
that as many as 80 percent of the jobs being created over the next 10
years will require some postsecondary education. This will include many
adult learners who will return to college for additional training. This
also includes new students attending college for the first time later
in life to obtain new skills or to improve their current skills.
Congress needs to ensure that we have a comprehensive system of
workforce education and training established, one that includes the
Workforce Investment Act, the Higher Education Act, and career and
technical education, as well as elementary and secondary education. The
needs of the new workforce will require a lifelong commitment to
learning, where workers are able to return to school and re-enter the
workforce seamlessly.
Many workers in my home State are leaving to find better jobs
elsewhere. To create the kind of good jobs with good futures that will
keep people in Wyoming, we need workers with the skills that the new,
global economy demands. Whether a company decides to open a plant in
Casper or China, they depend on a qualified local workforce.
This legislation would help meet the needs of businesses today and
into the future. It would help postsecondary institutions develop and
implement curriculum related to high skilled or high-wage occupations.
It would also provide support for institutions to increase their
capacity to serve adult learners and students pursuing high-growth
occupations.
This legislation would provide additional assistance for first-time
college students who are attending school to receive advanced skill
training or are looking to improve their skill set to enter high-wage
or high-skilled occupations.
This legislation also provides support for small business owners,
operators, and their employees to receive skill training at
institutions of higher education so our small businesses can continue
to lead the economic growth of our Nation.
This legislation also provides support for rural communities to
recruit and retrain elementary and secondary education, so these areas
can prepare their students for college and entry into the workforce
with the skills they need to succeed, not only in postsecondary
education, but in life.
This legislation also helps students better understand the cost of
attending college by making the information collected by the Department
of Education more accessible. Helping prospective students understand
how to obtain aid and help pay for college is just as important as
making sure students have access to the financial aid to support them
through college.
I look forward to working with Chairman Gregg to advance these ideas
to ensure that the American workforce is prepared with the skills
necessary to successfully compete in the global economy.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2795
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 ``Higher Education
Affordability, Access, and Opportunity Act of 2004''.
SEC. 2. IMPROVEMENTS IN MARKET INFORMATION AND PUBLIC
ACCOUNTABILITY.
(a) Data Dissemination.--Section 131(b) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1015(b)) is amended to read
as follows:
``(b) Comparative Data.--
``(1) In general.--Each year the Secretary shall make
available to the public the information described in
paragraph (2), disaggregated by institution of higher
education, in a form that enables the public to compare the
information among institutions.
``(2) Information.--The information referred to in
paragraph (1) is the following:
``(A) Tuition and fees for a full-time undergraduate
student.
``(B) Cost of attendance for a full-time undergraduate
student.
``(C) The average annual cost of attendance for a full-time
undergraduate student for the 10 preceding academic years, or
if data are not available for the 10 preceding academic
years, data for as many of the 10 preceding academic years as
is available.
``(D) The percentage of full-time undergraduate students
receiving financial assistance, including--
``(i) Federal grants;
``(ii) State and local grants;
``(iii) institutional grants; and
``(iv) loans to students.
``(E) The average percentage of credit hours accepted from
students transferring to an institution of higher education
from another institution of higher education, and the policy
of the accepting institution of higher education for the
transfer of credit.
``(F) The percentage of students who have completed an
undergraduate program who are placed in unsubsidized
employment not later than 12 months after the date of
completion of the program.
``(G) A ranking of the dollar and percentage increases in
tuition for all institutions of higher education for which
data are available, disaggregated by quartile.
``(3) Standard definitions.--In carrying out this section,
the Secretary shall use the standard definitions developed
under subsection (a)(3).''.
(b) Study and Annual Report.--Section 131(c) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1015(c)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by inserting
``and costs'' after ``expenditures'';
(B) in subparagraph (F), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(C) in subparagraph (G), by striking the period and
inserting ``; and''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(H) the information and costs described in subparagraphs
(D) through (G) of paragraph (2).'';
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' after the
semicolon;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and
inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) national trends in the cost of attending an
institution of higher education;
``(E) the mean cost of attending an institution of higher
education, disaggregated by type of institution of higher
education;
``(F) the mean annual cost of attending an institution of
higher education for the 10 preceding academic years (if
available), disaggregated by type of institution of higher
education; and
``(G) the assistance provided to institutions of higher
education by each State, which information the Secretary
shall make available to the public.''; and
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Final'' and
inserting ``Annual'';
(B) by striking ``a report'' and inserting ``an annual
report'';
(C) by inserting ``and the evaluation required by paragraph
(2)'' after ``paragraph (1)''; and
(D) by striking ``not later than September 30, 2002''.
SEC. 3. TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS.
(a) Definition of High Need Local Educational Agency.--
Section 201(b)(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1021(b)(2)) is amended--
(1) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A), by striking
``that serves an elementary school or secondary school
located in an area in which there is'';
(2) in each of subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), by
inserting ``that serves an elementary school or secondary
school located in an area in which there is'' before ``a
high'';
(3) in subparagraph (B) (as so amended), by striking ``or''
after the semicolon;
(4) in subparagraph (C) (as so amended), by striking the
period and inserting ``; or''; and
(5) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) with a total of less than 600 students in average
daily attendance at the schools that are served by the local
educational agency and all of those schools are designated
with a school locale code of 7 or 8, as determined by the
Secretary.''.
(b) Definition of Eligible Partnerships.--Section
203(b)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1023(b)(1)(B)) is amended by inserting ``educational service
agency (as defined in section 9101 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965),'' after ``State educational
agency,''.
SEC. 4. GRANTS FOR JOB SKILL TRAINING.
Title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1051 et seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating part F as part G; and
(2) by inserting after part E the following:
``PART F--JOB SKILL TRAINING
``Subpart 1--Job Skill Training in High-Growth Occupations or
Industries
``SEC. 371. JOB SKILL TRAINING IN HIGH-GROWTH OCCUPATIONS OR
INDUSTRIES.
``(a) Grants Authorized.--The Secretary is authorized to
award grants, on a competitive basis, to eligible
partnerships to enable the eligible partnerships to provide
relevant
[[Page S9139]]
job skill training in high-growth industries or occupations.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Eligible partnership.--The term `eligible
partnership' means a partnership--
``(A) between an institution of higher education and a
local board (as such term is defined in section 101 of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998); or
``(B) if an institution of higher education is located
within a State that does not operate local boards, between
the institution of higher education and a State board (as
such term is defined in section 101 of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998).
``(2) Nontraditional student.--The term `nontraditional
student' means a student who--
``(A) is independent, as defined in section 480(d);
``(B) attends an institution of higher education--
``(i) on less than a full-time basis;
``(ii) via evening, weekend, modular, or compressed
courses; or
``(iii) via distance learning methods; or
``(C) has delayed enrollment at an institution of higher
education.
``(3) Institution of higher education.--The term
`institution of higher education' means an institution of
higher education, as defined in section 101(b), that offers a
1- or 2-year program of study leading to a degree or
certificate.
``(c) Application.--
``(1) In general.--Each eligible partnership that desires a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by
such additional information as the Secretary may require.
``(2) Contents.--Each application submitted under paragraph
(1) shall include a description of--
``(A) how the eligible partnership, through the institution
of higher education, will provide relevant job skill training
for students to enter high-growth occupations or industries;
``(B) local high-growth occupations or industries; and
``(C) the need for qualified workers to meet the local
demand of high-growth occupations or industries.
``(d) Award Basis.--In awarding grants under this section,
the Secretary shall--
``(1) ensure an equitable distribution of grant funds under
this section among urban and rural areas of the United
States; and
``(2) take into consideration the capability of the
institution of higher education--
``(A) to offer relevant, high quality instruction and job
skill training for students entering a high-growth occupation
or industry;
``(B) to involve the local business community and to place
graduates in the community in employment in high-growth
occupations or industries;
``(C) to assist students in obtaining loans under section
428L, if appropriate, or other forms of student financial
assistance;
``(D) to serve nontraditional or low-income students, or
adult or displaced workers; and
``(E) to serve students from rural or remote communities.
``(e) Use of Funds.--Grant funds provided under this
section may be used--
``(1) to expand or create academic programs or programs of
training that provide relevant job skill training for high-
growth occupations or industries;
``(2) to purchase equipment which will facilitate the
development of academic programs or programs of training that
provide training for high-growth occupations or industries;
``(3) to support outreach efforts that enable students to
attend institutions of higher education with academic
programs or programs of training focused on high-growth
occupations or industries;
``(4) to expand or create programs for distance, evening,
weekend, modular, or compressed learning opportunities that
provide relevant job skill training in high-growth
occupations or industries;
``(5) to build partnerships with local businesses in high-
growth occupations or industries; and
``(6) for other uses that the Secretary determines to be
consistent with the intent of this section.
``(f) Requirements.--
``(1) Fiscal agent.--For the purpose of this section, the
institution of higher education in an eligible partnership
shall serve as the fiscal agent and grant recipient for the
eligible partnership.
``(2) Duration.--The Secretary shall award grants under
this section for a 1-year period.
``(3) Availability of grant funds.--Grant funds awarded
under this section shall be available for not more than 18
months unless, at the Secretary's discretion, the Secretary
extends the availability of the grant funds.
``(4) Supplement, not supplant.--Funds made available under
this section shall be used to supplement and not supplant
other Federal, State, and local funds available to the
eligible partnership for carrying out the activities
described in subsection (e).
``Subpart 2--Small Business Innovation Partnership Grants
``SEC. 375. SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION PARTNERSHIP GRANTS.
``(a) Grants Authorized.--The Secretary is authorized to
award grants to eligible partnerships to enable the eligible
partnerships to provide training and relevant job skills to
small business owners or operators for the purpose of
facilitating small business development in the communities
served by the eligible partnerships.
``(b) Definition of Eligible Partnership.--In this section
the term `eligible partnership' means a partnership between
or among an institution of higher education and 1 or more
entities that the Secretary, in consultation with the
Administrator of the Small Business Administration,
identifies as facilitating small business development, which
may include--
``(1) a community development financial institution;
``(2) a small business development center; or
``(3) a microenterprise lending institution.
``(c) Award Basis.--The Secretary shall award grants under
this section on the basis of--
``(1) the ability of an eligible partnership to facilitate
small business development; and
``(2)(A) the ability of an eligible partnership to serve a
rural community;
``(B) the ability of an eligible partnership to serve a
low-income population; or
``(C) other criteria developed by the Secretary in
consultation with the Administrator of the Small Business
Administration.
``(d) Limitation.--Of the funds appropriated under section
378 for this part for a fiscal year, the Secretary is
authorized to use not more than $15,000,000 of such funds to
carry out this section.
``Subpart 3--Administrative Provisions
``SEC. 378. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
part $65,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.''.
SEC. 5. LEAP APPLICATIONS.
Section 415C of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
1070c-2) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting after the first
sentence the following: ``A State agency may submit an
application under this section in partnership with a
philanthropic organization within the State, a public or
private degree granting institution of higher education
within the State, or a combination of such organizations or
institutions.''; and
(2) in subsection (b)(10), by inserting ``, from
philanthropic, institutional, or private funds, or from a
combination of such sources'' before the period.
SEC. 6. WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT LOAN PROGRAM.
Part B of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1071 et seq.) is amended by inserting after section
428K (20 U.S.C. 1078-11) the following:
``SEC. 428L. HIGH-GROWTH OCCUPATION OR INDUSTRY WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT STUDENT LOANS.
``(a) Loan Program Authorized.--The Secretary shall carry
out a loan program under which eligible students may receive
a loan of not more than $2,000 for each of the first 2 years
of the eligible students' undergraduate program of study in
the same manner as the eligible students receive loans under
this part and part D.
``(b) Definitions.--
``(1) Eligible institution of higher education.--The term
`eligible institution of higher education' means an
institution of higher education that offers undergraduate
academic programs or undergraduate programs of training in a
subject identified under subsection (d)(1) by the State board
of the State where the institution of higher education is
located.
``(2) Eligible student.--The term `eligible student' means
an undergraduate student who--
``(A) is otherwise eligible for a loan under this part or
part D;
``(B) enters into an agreement with the eligible
institution of higher education where the student is or will
be in attendance, under which the student agrees to pursue an
undergraduate academic program or undergraduate program of
training that trains the student for employment in a high-
growth occupation or industry identified under subsection
(d)(1);
``(C) is age 18 or older; and
``(D) has an expected family contribution (calculated under
part F) equal to or less than zero.
``(3) State board; local board.--The terms `State board'
and `local board' have the meanings given such terms in
section 101 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
``(c) Limits on Loan Amounts.--
``(1) Annual loan limits.--The total aggregate amount of
loans made to an eligible student under this part (including
this section) and part D for each of the first and second
years of the eligible student's program of study at an
eligible institution of higher education, or their equivalent
(as determined by the Secretary), that may be covered by
Federal loan insurance may not exceed $4,625 for each such
year, notwithstanding sections 425 and 428.
``(2) Aggregate limits.--The Secretary shall include the
amount of any loans received by an eligible student under
this section in calculating the eligible student's aggregate
loan limits under sections 425(a)(2) and 428(b)(1)(B).
``(3) Availability of other funds.--An eligible student who
receives the maximum loan amount allowed under this section
remains eligible for any other program for which the eligible
student qualifies under this Act.
``(d) Identification of High-Growth Occupations or
Industries.--
[[Page S9140]]
``(1) In general.--The State board, in consultation with
the local boards and the State entity or agency responsible
for licensing institutions of higher education, shall
identify high growth occupations or industries in accordance
with paragraph (2).
``(2) Timing.--The State board shall review and update the
identification required under paragraph (1) each time the
State board is required to submit or resubmit a State plan
under section 112 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998.
``(3) Special rule.--A student who has completed 1 year of
a 2-year undergraduate academic program or undergraduate
program of training in a subject which was previously
identified as preparation for a high-growth occupation or
industry but, after the review under paragraph (2), is no
longer so identified, shall be eligible to receive a loan
under this section for the student's second year of such
program of study if the student--
``(A) qualified as an eligible student, as defined in
subsection (b)(2), and received a loan under this section,
for the first year of such program of study; and
``(B) meets the qualifications of subparagraphs (A), (C),
and (D) of subsection (b)(2).
``(e) Funds for Administration.--
``(1) In general.--From funds appropriated under subsection
(f), the Secretary shall make available to each eligible
institution of higher education serving an eligible student
with a loan made under this section not more than the amount
determined under paragraph (2).
``(2) Amount.--The amount referred to in paragraph (1) for
each eligible institution of higher education serving an
eligible student with a loan made under this section is 2
percent of the total amount of all loans made under this
section to eligible students at the eligible institution of
higher education, or $100,000, whichever is less.
``(3) Uses.--The funds made available under paragraph (1)
may be used for the following purposes:
``(A) Office.--To create an office of business and
workforce partnerships at the eligible institution of higher
education to provide staff support for building relationships
between the eligible institution of higher education and
local businesses.
``(B) Annual report.--To provide an annual report to the
Secretary regarding the number of eligible students receiving
loans made under this section who--
``(i) remain in their academic program or program of
training;
``(ii) graduate from their academic program or program of
training;
``(iii) transfer to another institution of higher
education; or
``(iv) are placed in unsubsidized employment not later than
12 months after graduation.
``(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section such
sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2005 and each of the
4 succeeding fiscal years.''.
SEC. 7. REQUIREMENT RELATING TO CREDIT TRANSFER.
(a) Program Participation Agreements.--Section 487(a) of
the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1094(a)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(24) The institution will not exclude the transfer of
credits earned by a student completing courses or programs at
other eligible institutions of higher education solely on the
basis of the agency or association that accredited such other
eligible institution if that agency or association is
recognized by the Secretary pursuant to section 496 to be a
reliable authority as to the quality of the education or
training offered and is currently listed by the Secretary
pursuant to section 101(c).''.
(b) Accrediting Agency and Association Requirements.--
Section 496(a) (20 U.S.C. 1099b(a)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (7);
(2) by striking the period at the end of paragraph (8) and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(9) such agency or association not adopt or apply
standards, policies, or practices that restrict or deny the
transfer of credits earned by a student completing courses or
programs at other eligible institutions of higher education
solely on the basis of the agency or association that
accredited such other eligible institution if that agency or
association is recognized by the Secretary pursuant to this
section to be a reliable authority as to the quality of the
education or training offered and is currently listed by the
Secretary pursuant to section 101(c).''.
(c) Accrediting Agency Standards.--Section 496(a)(5) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1099b(a)(5)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (I);
(2) by inserting ``and'' after the semicolon at the end of
subparagraph (J); and
(3) by inserting after subparagraph (J) the following new
subparagraph:
``(K) policies for the transfer of credit and the
notification of the public of such policies;''.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, it is my pleasure to co-sponsor, the
Higher Education Access, Affordability and Opportunity Act being
introduced to day by Senator Enzi. This legislation is an issue of
great concern to Senators and our constituents: job loss. There is
really nothing new about job loss in America. Our strength as an
economy is not measured by how many jobs we lose; it is measured by how
many good new jobs we create to replace those jobs and how well we
train those people to fill those jobs. We don't want to lose any jobs.
We want to recognize the pain that goes with moving from one job to
another. But, the best thing we can do about job loss is to create an
environment in which good new jobs can grow and to offer the training
resources necessary to hold those jobs.
Senator Enzi believes, as do I, that a comprehensive approach to
creating jobs and training workers is necessary to adapt to the
changing demands of the modern economy. The Higher Education Act was
enacted to give more students a change to attend college. It was not
intended to be a job training bill, nor should it become one. There is,
however, a need to create a stronger partnership between institutions
of higher education and the 21st century workforce. The goal of access
to higher education and the goal of training a highly skilled workforce
are not mutually exclusive.
Community colleges are our secret weapons in workforce development.
This bill used our secret weapon to create a competitive grant program
to help community colleges develop academic programs focusing on areas
of high-growth employment. Among other things, it provides additional
subsidized loans for high-growth job sector training programs such as
technology and health care.
In higher education we focus really on two principles: The first is
autonomy and the second is choice. We allow generous amounts of
government money to follow students to the schools of their choice.
These principles provide students with flexibility to choose among fast
moving institutions, and facilitate contracts with businesses. These
competitive grants and additional subsidized loans will give local
governments both the resources necessary and autonomy to work with
their local community colleges to develop programs that will train
workers for the jobs that are available within their communities.
I will continue to work with Senator Enzi on these important
legislative initiatives and make them a part of the reauthorization of
the Higher Education Act.
______
By Mr. CRAIG (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
S. 2796. A bill to clarify that service marks, collective marks, and
certification marks are entitled to the same protections, rights, and
privileges of trademarks; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, today Senator Durbin and I are introducing
legislation strengthening current law concerning certification marks,
collective marks, and service marks.
While some of our colleagues may not recognize these terms, I doubt
there is any Senator who has not come into contact with one of these
marks. For example, if you bought the best baking potatoes in the
world, you are familiar with the ``Grown in Idaho '' or ``Idaho
Potatoes '' certification mark. Perhaps you know the certification
mark ``UL,'' which stands for Underwriters Laboratory and signifies
that an electrical product meets certain safety standards. If you watch
network television and have seen the CBS ``eye,'' you have seen a
service mark. The union labels on many products are collective marks.
To explain the differences among these marks: service marks are
words, names, symbols, or characters that distinguish the mark holder's
services, while trademarks distinguish the mark holder's goods.
Collective marks are trademarks that are used by organization or
association to identify goods or services produced by members of a
group. The certification mark is a trade or service mark used to
certify characteristics about a product or service; it may indicate
that the product or service originates in a specific geographic region,
or meets certain standards of quality or mode of manufacture, or the
work that went into it was performed by members of an organization.
While they are somewhat different, these marks all serve the same
purpose--that is, they enable the public to distinguish among products
and services and prevent consumers from being deceived by similar
brands. Congress
[[Page S9141]]
determined that marks would serve the public interest by enhancing
product quality and safety, and provided legal protection to these
marks under the Lanham Act. The federal law protects all four kinds of
marks equally; specifically, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1503 and 15 U.S.C.
Sec. 1504 provide that service marks, collective marks, and
certification marks ``shall be entitled to the protection provided'' to
trademarks, except where Congress provides otherwise by statute.
The principle of equal treatment also applies to ``no challenge''
provisions in license agreements for the use of a trademark, service
mark, collective mark, or certification mark. It is common for such
agreements to include provisions under which licensees acknowledge the
validity of and agree not to challenge the marks. By protecting the
validity of the marks, these provisions reduce potential litigation
costs for mark owners and protect the investment made by licensees. A
long line of cases has upheld ``no challenge'' provisions in trademark
licenses and dismissed validity challenges.
Unfortunately, the clarity of the Lanham Act on these points has been
confused by a recent decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in
the case of Idaho Potato Commission v. M&M Produce Farm and Sales. That
decision interpreted the Lanham Act as requiring that certification
marks should be treated differently from trademarks with respect to
``no challenge'' provisions. The court mistakenly likened the public
policy considerations surrounding certification marks to those
surrounding patents.
This decision has raised great consternation among the holders of
certification marks and their licenses throughout the United States--
more than two dozen of whom joined in an amicus brief challenging the
court's reasoning. Congress should be equally concerned, because this
decision has the potential to undermine the Lanham Act and
the certification mark system itself.
The legislation we are introducing today would not change current
law, but would only underscore the policy that Congress clearly
intended in the first place. We propose to add the words ``rights an
privileges'' to the two sections of the law that I quoted above, which
would clarify that registered service marks, collective marks, and
certification marks are ``entitled to the protections, rights, and
privileges'' provided to trademarks. While I have learned never to call
legislation ``simple,'' I would stress that at least our intention is
simple: to reinstate the original intent of Congress and indicate our
support of the view that these marks are to be given equal legal
treatment.
I invite all my colleagues to review this legislation and consider
the important public policy interests it would protect. It is not only
the mark holders and licensees in your State, but all consumers across
the nation who have a stake in this bill, and I hope the Senate will
act swiftly to approve it.
I ask unanimous consent 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. 2796
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PROTECTIONS, RIGHTS, AND PRIVILEGES OF SERVICE
MARKS, COLLECTIVE MARKS, AND CERTIFICATION
MARKS.
The Act entitled ``An Act to provide for the registration
and protection of trade-marks used in commerce, to carry out
the provisions of certain international conventions, and for
other purposes'', approved July 5, 1946 (commonly referred to
as the Trademark Act of 1946) is amended--
(1) in section 3 (15 U.S.C. 1053) in the first sentence, by
striking ``protection'' and inserting ``protections, rights,
and privileges''; and
(2) in section 4 (15 U.S.C. 1054) in the first sentence, by
striking ``protection'' and inserting ``protections, rights,
and privileges''.
____________________