[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 126 (Thursday, October 7, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10704-S10747]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. DURBIN:
S. 2910. A bill to establish the Food Safety Administration to
protect the public health by preventing food-borne illness, ensuring
the safety of food intended for human consumption, improving research
on contaminants leading to food-borne illness, and improving security
of food from intentional contamination; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, when Americans sit down at the dinner
table, their confidence in the safety of the food they are eating is
based in part on the knowledge that the Federal Government is working
hard to ensure their food is not contaminate. Right now, our food is
the safest in the world, but there are widening gaps in our food safety
net due to emerging threats and the fact that food safety oversight has
evolved over time to spread over several government agencies. This
mismatched, piecemeal approach to food safety could spell disaster if
we do not act quickly and decisively.
A single food safety agency with authority based on sound scientific
principles would provide this country with the greatest hope of
reducing foodborne illnesses and preparing for a bioterrorist attack on
our food supply.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that
as many as 76 million people suffer from food poisoning each year. Of
those individuals, approximately 325,000 will be hospitalized, and more
than 5,000 will die. Factors such as emerging pathogens, an aging
population at high risk for foodborne illnesses, an increasing volume
of food imports, and people eating outside their homes more often
underscore the need for us to take charge and shed the old bureaucratic
shackles that have tied us to the overlapping and inefficient ad hoc
food safety system of the past.
I rise today to introduce the Safe Food Act of 2004. This legislation
would create a single, independent Federal
[[Page S10705]]
food safety agency to administer all aspects of Federal food safety
inspections, enforcement, standards-setting and research in order to
protect public health. The components of the agencies now charged with
protecting the food supply, primarily housed at the Food and Drug
Administration and the Agriculture Department, would be transferred to
this new agency.
The new Food Safety Administrator would be responsible for the safety
of the food supply and would carry out that charge by implementing the
registration and recordkeeping requirements of the Bioterrorism Act of
2002; ensuring slaughterhouses and food processing plants have
procedures in place to prevent and reduce food contamination; regularly
inspecting domestic food facilities, with inspection frequency based on
risk; and centralizing the authority to detain, seize, condemn and
recall food that is adulterated or misbranded. The Administrator would
be charged with requiring food producers to make it possible for their
products to be traced in the event of a foodborne illness outbreak in
order to minimize the health impact of such an event.
The Administrator would also have the power to examine the food
safety practices of foreign countries and work with the states to
enforce food safety laws, including the ability to seek various civil
and criminal penalties for serious violations of the food safety laws.
The Administrator would also actively oversee public education and
research programs on foodborne illness.
In this era of limited budgets, it is our responsibility to
streamline the Federal food safety system. The United States simply
cannot afford to continue operating multiple redundant systems. This is
not about more regulation, a super agency, or increased bureaucracy. It
is about common sense and the more effective marshaling of our existing
resources.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this important piece of
legislation.
______
By Mr. FEINGOLD:
S. 2913. A bill to establish a demonstration project to train
unemployed workers for employment as health care professionals, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, over the past year, I have come to this
floor on a number of occasions to discuss the loss of manufacturing
jobs in Wisconsin and around the country and ways in which I think that
Congress should act to stem the flow of these jobs to foreign
countries.
According to the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development,
Wisconsin has lost more than 80,000 manufacturing jobs since 2000.
Nationally, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the country
has lost more than 2.8 million manufacturing jobs during that same time
period. In addition to the loss of manufacturing jobs, I am deeply
troubled by the Bush administration's contention that the outsourcing
of American service sector and other jobs is good for the economy. I am
concerned about the message that this policy sends to Wisconsinites and
all Americans who are currently employed in these sectors.
There is something of a silver lining to the looming cloud of
manufacturing and other jobs loss: the country's workforce development
system.
In spite of stretched resources and long waiting lists for services,
our workforce development boards are making a tremendous effort to
retrain laid-off workers and other job seekers for new jobs. And this
effort is clearly evident in Wisconsin, where my State's 11 workforce
development boards are leading the way in finding innovative solutions
to retraining workers for new careers on shoestring budgets.
I strongly support the work of these agencies, and have urged the
administration and Senate appropriators to provide adequate funding for
the job training programs authorized by the Workforce Investment Act. I
regret that the administration's budget request for fiscal year 2005
does not provide adequate funding for WIA, and I will continue to work
to ensure that the workforce development boards in my State and across
our country receive the resources that they need to help job seekers
get the training they need to be successful.
I am committed to finding resources to retrain those who have been
laid off from the manufacturing and service sectors and who wish to
find new jobs in high-demand fields such as health care.
As most of my colleagues know all too well, we are facing a
significant shortage of health care workers. Congress has made some
progress in addressing the nursing shortage, but we need to expand our
efforts. Shortages of health professionals pose a real threat to the
health of our communities by impacting access to timely, high-quality
health care. Studies have shown that shortages of nurses in our
hospitals and health facilities increase medical errors, which directly
affects patient health.
As our population ages, and the baby-boomers need more health care,
our need for all types of health professionals is only going to
increase. This is particularly true for the field of long-term care.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we are going to need an
additional 1.2 million nursing aides, home health aides, and other
health professionals in long-term care before the year 2010.
As our demand for health care workers grows, so does the number of
jobs available within this sector. Currently, health services is the
largest industry in the country, providing 12.9 million jobs in 2002.
It is estimated that 16 percent of all new jobs created between 2002
and 2012 will be in health services. This accounts for 3.5 million new
jobs--more than any other industry.
Workforce development agencies in my home State of Wisconsin are
already working to support displaced workers in their communities by
training them for health care jobs, since there is a real need for
workers in these fields. These agencies are helping communities get and
maintain access to high-quality health care by ensuring that there are
enough health care workers to care for their communities.
As the executive director of one of the workforce development boards
in my State put it, ``[t]here are simply not many good quality jobs to
replace manufacturing jobs lost to rural communities. The medical
professions, by offering a `living wage' and good benefits, provide an
excellent alternative to manufacturing for sustaining a higher, family-
oriented standard of living.''
I believe we need to support our communities in these efforts by
providing them with the resources they need to establish, sustain, or
expand these important programs. For that reason, today I am
introducing the Community-Based Health Care Retraining Act. This bill
would amend the Workforce Investment Act to authorize a demonstration
project to provide grants to community-based coalitions, led by local
workforce development boards, to create programs to retrain unemployed
workers who wish to obtain new jobs in the health care professions. My
bill would authorize a total of $25 million for grants between $100,000
and $500,000, and, in the interest of fiscal responsibility, it ensures
that these grants would be offset.
This bill will help provide communities with the resources they need
to run retraining programs for the health professions. The funds could
be used for a variety of purposes--from increasing the capacity of our
schools and training facilities, to providing financial and social
support for workers who are in retraining programs. This bill is
flexible in what the grant funds could be used for, because I believe
that communities know best about the resources they need to run an
efficient program.
This bill represents a nexus in my efforts to support workers whose
jobs have been shipped overseas and to ensure that all Americans have
access to the high-quality health care that they deserve. By providing
targeted assistance to train laid-off workers who wish to obtain new
jobs in the health care sector, we can both help unemployed Americans
and improve the availability and quality of health care that is
available in our communities.
I am pleased that this bill is supported by a variety of
organizations that are committed to providing high-quality job training
and health care services, including: the National Association of
Workforce Boards, the American Health Care Association, the Wisconsin
Association of Job Training Executives, Northwest Wisconsin
Concentrated Employment Program, the
[[Page S10706]]
Northwest Wisconsin Workforce Investment Board, and the Southwestern
Wisconsin Workforce Development Board.
I ask unanimous consent that the full text of this bill, and the text
of the letters of support from the above-mentioned groups, be printed
in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
In order to ensure that our workers are able to compete in the new
economy, we must ensure that they have the tools they need to be
trained or retrained for high-demand jobs such as those in the health
care field. My bill is a small step toward providing the resources
necessary to achieve this goal. I will continue to work to strengthen
the American manufacturing sector and to support those workers who have
been displaced due to bad trade agreements and other policies that have
led to the loss of American jobs.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 2913
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 ``Community-Based Health Care
Retraining Act''.
SEC. 2. HEALTH PROFESSIONS TRAINING DEMONSTRATION PROJECT.
Section 171 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29
U.S.C. 2916) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(e) Health Professions Training Demonstration Project.--
``(1) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Covered community.--The term `covered community'
means a community or region that--
``(i) has experienced a significant percentage decline in
positions in the manufacturing or service sectors; and
``(ii)(I) is eligible for designation under section 332 of
the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254e) as a health
professional shortage area;
``(II) is eligible to be served by a health center under
section 330 or a grantee under section 330(h) (relating to
homeless individuals) of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 254b, 254b(h));
``(III) has a shortage of personal health services, as
determined under criteria issued by the Secretary of Health
and Human Services under section 1861(aa)(2) of the Social
Security Act (relating to rural health clinics) (42 U.S.C.
1395x(aa)(2)); or
``(IV) is designated by a Governor (in consultation with
the medical community) as a shortage area or medically
underserved community.
``(B) Covered worker.--The term `covered worker' means an
individual who--
``(i)(I) has been terminated or laid off, or who has
received a notice of termination or layoff, from employment
in a manufacturing or service sector;
``(II)(aa) is eligible for or has exhausted entitlement to
unemployment compensation; or
``(bb) has been employed for a duration sufficient to
demonstrate, to the appropriate entity at a one-stop center
referred to in section 134(c), attachment to the workforce,
but is not eligible for unemployment compensation due to
insufficient earnings or having performed services for an
employer that were not covered under a State unemployment
compensation law; and
``(III) is unlikely to return to a previous industry or
occupation; or
``(ii)(I) has been terminated or laid off, or has received
a notice of termination or layoff, from employment in a
manufacturing or service sector as a result of any permanent
closure of, or any substantial layoff at, a plant, facility,
or enterprise; or
``(II) is employed in a manufacturing or service sector at
a facility at which the employer has made a general
announcement that such facility will close within 180 days.
``(C) Health care professional.--The term `health care
professional'--
``(i) means an individual who is involved with--
``(I) the delivery of health care services, or related
services, pertaining to--
``(aa) the identification, evaluation, and prevention of
diseases, disorders, or injuries; or
``(bb) home-based or community-based long-term care;
``(II) the delivery of dietary and nutrition services; or
``(III) rehabilitation and health systems management; and
``(ii) includes nurses, home health aides, nursing
assistants, physician assistants, dental hygienists,
diagnostic medical sonographers, dietitians, medical
technologists, occupational therapists, physical therapists,
radiographers, respiratory therapists, emergency medical
service technicians, and speech-language pathologists.
``(2) Establishment of project.--In accordance with
subsection (b), the Secretary shall establish and carry out a
health professions training demonstration project.
``(3) Grants.--In carrying out the project, the Secretary,
after consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human
Services, shall make grants to eligible entities to enable
the entities to carry out programs in covered communities to
train covered workers for employment as health care
professionals. The Secretary shall make each grant in an
amount of not less than $100,000 and not more than $500,000.
``(4) Eligible entities.--Notwithstanding subsection
(b)(2)(B), to be eligible to receive a grant under this
subsection to carry out a program in a covered community, an
entity shall be a partnership that is--
``(A) under the direction of a local workforce investment
board established under section 117 that is serving the
covered community; and
``(B) composed of members serving the covered community,
such as--
``(i) a community college;
``(ii) a vocational or technical school;
``(iii) a health clinic or hospital;
``(iv) a home-based or community-based long-term care
facility or program; or
``(v) a health care facility administered by the Secretary
of Veterans Affairs.
``(5) Applications.--To be eligible to receive a grant
under this subsection, an entity shall submit an application
to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing
such information as the Secretary may require, including, at
a minimum--
``(A) a proposal to use the grant funds to establish or
expand a training program in order to train covered workers
for employment as health care professionals or
paraprofessionals;
``(B) information demonstrating the need for the training
and support services to be provided through the program;
``(C) information describing the manner in which the entity
will expend the grant funds, and the activities to be carried
out with the funds; and
``(D) information demonstrating that the entity meets the
requirements of paragraph (4).
``(6) Selection.--In making grants under paragraph (3), the
Secretary, after consultation with the Secretary of Health
and Human Services, shall select--
``(A) eligible entities submitting applications that meet
such criteria as the Secretary of Labor determines to be
appropriate; and
``(B) among such entities, the eligible entities serving
the covered communities with the greatest need for the grants
and the greatest potential to benefit from the grants.
``(7) Use of funds.--
``(A) In General.--An entity that receives a grant under
this subsection shall use the funds made available through
the grant for training and support services that meet the
needs described in the application submitted under paragraph
(5), which may include--
``(i) increasing capacity at an educational institution or
training center to train individuals for employment as health
professionals, such as by--
``(I) expanding a facility, subject to subparagraph (B);
``(II) expanding course offerings;
``(III) hiring faculty;
``(IV) providing a student loan repayment program for the
faculty;
``(V) establishing or expanding clinical education
opportunities;
``(VI) purchasing equipment, such as computers, books,
clinical supplies, or a patient simulator; or
``(VII) conducting recruitment; or
``(ii) providing support services for covered workers
participating in the training, such as--
``(I) providing tuition assistance;
``(II) establishing or expanding distance education
programs;
``(III) providing transportation assistance; or
``(IV) providing child care.
``(B) Limitation.--To be eligible to use the funds to
expand a facility, the eligible entity shall demonstrate to
the Secretary in an application submitted under paragraph (5)
that the entity can increase the capacity described in
subparagraph (A)(i) only by expanding the facility.
``(8) Funding.--Of the amounts appropriated to, and
available at the discretion of, the Secretary or the
Secretary of Health and Human Services for programmatic and
administrative expenditures, a total of $25,000,000 shall be
used to establish and carry out the demonstration project
described in paragraph (2) in accordance with this
subsection.''.
____
National Association of
Workforce Boards,
Washington, DC, September 28, 2004.
Hon. Russell Feingold,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Feingold: This letter is in regards to your
bill, the Community-Based Health Care Retraining Act, which
seeks to establish a demonstration project to train
unemployed workers for employment as health care
professionals. The National Association of Workforce Boards
(NAWB) would like to support your efforts in linking
America's workforce investment boards with health care
training. Our members can be a valuable resource in the
transition of manufacturing workers to the numerous
employment opportunities in the health care field.
NAWB is the national association that represents the
interests of the 650 workforce investment boards across the
country. These boards consist of over 15,000 private sector
[[Page S10707]]
business leaders, appointed by their Governors and local
elected officials, who provide leadership and governance for
the public workforce development system. In existence since
1979, NANWB has been a leader in the effort to create a
public workforce system. that is responsive to businesses and
job seekers alike.
As you know, meeting the ever-increasing needs of America's
workers and employers is critical for prosperity in the
United States. Developing an educated and skilled workforce
to attract and retain business is a challenge facing all
communities. The growing education and workforce skills
mismatch between what the current American workforce offers
and what employers need is particularly acute in high-skill
industry sectors. However, these are the very industries that
hold the most economic promise for our current workers and
the emerging workforce, our nation's young people. The
challenge posed for policy makers is aligning America's
workforce with rapidly changing economic conditions and
opportunities, while simultaneously maintaining
competitiveness to minimize off-shoring.
Four of five U.S. manufacturers struggled to find
candidates for skilled jobs, according to a 2003 survey by
the National Association of Manufacturers. Ironically, this
search for skilled workers occurred while many plants were
going thorough layoffs. The United States has seen 3 million
manufacturing jobs disappear.
Workers have permanently lost the jobs they once held at
these factories. New opportunities must be made to allow a
transition into new employment, especially for those who
cannot recover their job if demand increases. But in order to
do this, training dollars must be made available to those
employees who cannot regain employment within the
manufacturing industry.
Through your bill, employers in the health care industry
that desperately need skilled workers can find the human
capital they desire in those who have been permanently laid
off from their manufacturing job. There has been an enormous
increase in the number of nursing and direct care
professional opportunities within the long-term care arena,
particularly within home-based care. These opportunities are
not only based on the number of employees needed. They
require a high level of skill, knowledge and compassion to
work in long-term care. Training dollars must be available to
introduce educated employees to the health care industry.
Employers on the lay-off end of manufacturing employment
and employers on the hiring end of health care industries
need to tap all available employment and training resources.
NAWB can assist both sides of the equation by connecting
employers with their local workforce boards. Investing in
training our workers is critical.
Our CEO, Ms. Stephanie Powers, is available to provide your
staff with any information you may require (phone: (202) 775-
0960 or email: [email protected]). Thank you for your interest
in our organization and the members we represent. The
National Association of Workforce Boards remains committed to
working with Congress as we continue our mission to build a
stronger, more competitive American workforce.
Sincerely,
J. Michael Zelley,
President, The Disability Network, Flint, MI, and Co-Chair,
Policy Committee, National Association of Workforce Boards.
Jeffrey Howe,
Vice President, Manager, Indiana Commercial Banking, First
Indiana Bank, N.A., Indianapolis, IN, and Chair, National
Association of Workforce Boards.
____
American Health Care Association,
Washington, DC, September 29, 2004.
Hon. Russell D. Feingold,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Feingold: On behalf of the American Health
Care Association, the nation's largest association of long
term care providers, and the National Center for Assisted
Living, I am writing you to offer our support for enactment
of the ``Community-Based Health Care Retraining Act'' you are
introducing.
Today, there is a critical shortage of health and long term
care professionals and paraprofessionals and it is growing.
In our nation's nursing facilities, there is a need for more
than 90,000 nurses and certified nursing assistants right now
to provide the hands-on care needed by the frail and elderly.
The need for these direct care workers will grow dramatically
in the future as the baby boom population moves into
retirement. America's high standard for quality can only be
maintained if there are enough front-line workers to provide
the direct hands-on care that will be needed. This is not a
job that can be handled off-shore.
Your legislation will help to address this shortage by
providing the means for a growing number of displaced
manufacturing and service sector workers to begin building
new careers in the health and long term care sectors. It does
so by utilizing federal dollars to redirect these displaced
workers into health care careers. It provides for expanding
the nation's training capacity and by increasing number of
educators that are and will be needed to make this transition
successful.
Senator Feingold, we commend you for the leadership you are
providing with the introduction of this legislation and look
forward to working with you to see this legislation passed
and enacted at the earliest opportunity.
Sincerely,
Hal Daub,
President & CEO.
____
Wisconsin Association of
Job Training Executives,
August 10, 2004.
Senator Russ Feingold,
Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Feingold: On behalf of the Wisconsin
Association of Job Training Executives (WAJTE), I am writing
to express our strong support for the proposed legislation
designed to address two significant workforce issues--the
loss of large numbers of manufacturing and service sector
jobs and the critical shortage of health care professionals.
As you know, both of these issues currently challenge the
workforce development delivery systems in Wisconsin.
Our association members are the chief executives of each of
Wisconsin's eleven Workforce Development Boards who have the
responsibility for overseeing the health of the local
economies in partnership with business, education, and local
governments. The proposed legislation offers these specific
strengths.
Ensures that eligible entities shall be a partnership under
the direction of a local board.
Limits grant funds to training programs for health care
professionals.
Allows for the use of grant funds for support services as
well as training.
Allows for capacity expansion in educational institutions.
If WAJTE members can be of assistance to you as this
legislation is introduced, please do not hesitate to contact
us.
Sincerely,
Francisco Sanchez,
Chairman.
____
CEP--WIB,
Ashland, WI, September 30, 2004.
Senator Russ Feingold,
Hart Senate Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Feingold: On behalf of the Northwest Wisconsin
Concentrated Employment Program, Inc. and the Northwest
Wisconsin Workforce Investment Board, Inc., I want to express
our enthusiastic support in the Community-Based Health Care
Retraining Act in Wisconsin.
This initiative will help to strengthen the economy of our
area. Some of our counties in Northwest Wisconsin are
experiencing high labor shortages particularly in the health
care industries. Further, our area wages are approximately
24% less than the State average, which adds to a poverty
situation made worse by rural isolation. This Community-Based
Health Care Retraining Act will address these serious
economic issues and help to alleviate the severe shortage of
health care workers.
This Act provides hope for the future economy and people of
our State. Please contact me if we can be of any further
assistance.
Sincerely yours,
Fred Schnook,
Executive Director.
____
Southwest Wisconsin
Workforce Development Board,
Dodgeville, WI, August 4, 2004.
Hon. Russ Feingold,
Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Feingold: I would like to take this
opportunity to comment on your proposed legislation regarding
health-care retraining. I believe it is an excellent proposal
that will address a serious need particularly within rural
communities. Please allow me to elaborate on several points
that support this legislation.
First, as executive director for a primarily rural
workforce development area, I can tell you how difficult it
is to replace manufacturing jobs. There simply are not many
good quality jobs to replace manufacturing jobs lost to rural
communities. The medical professions, by offering a ``living
wage'' and good benefits, provide an excellent alternative to
manufacturing for sustaining a higher, family-oriented
standard of living. Health-care is also a regional scope,
providing job opportunities for workers in surrounding
communities. Furthermore, medical professions are not
exportable and there is virtually no chance that health-care
jobs will be shipped out-of-country or overseas.
Second, I am chairperson of a small, rural community
hospital. For many years we have struggled to survive in a
very competitive market surrounded by large, corporate
medical organizations/hospitals in Janesville and Madison. I
believe that our hospital has a unique role within our
community--as a community-based facility we are closer to our
patients and can provide personalized ``hometown'' care. One
of our biggest problems is our ability to attract and retain
qualified, experienced health-care workers. With the
impending shortage caused by the retirement of ``baby
boomers'' we will find ourselves in an even more difficult
role as larger facilities offer higher salaries, better
benefits, incentive and sign-on bonuses, etc. to attract and
retain the workers they need. Rural hospitals will find
themselves left out and unable to compete for the caregivers
we need.
Third, there are several key organizations that lie at the
core of any community that
[[Page S10708]]
are vital to the quality of life within that community.
Schools are one example of this type of organizations.
Hospitals, nursing homes and other types of medical
facilities are other examples of key organizations that
support a higher standard of life within a rural community.
And finally, I would like to thank the Senator for
recognizing the vital role that Workforce Development Boards
(WDBs) play in our areas. The WDBs are regional organizations
providing oversight and coordination for economic and
workforce development activities. Furthermore, there are few
organizations today that are advocates for the ``worker''. I
believe that WDBs are an example of such an organization.
And, I believe it is critical to the success of a program
that the WDBs serve as the coordinating agency for the
delivery of this type of program.
For the reasons stated above, I strongly support your
proposed Health-Care Retraining Bill. Thank you for the
chance to offer my comments. I look forward to the
opportunity to participate in, what I believe to be, a
meaningful and critically important program particularly for
the rural communities.
Sincerely,
Robert T. Borremans,
Executive Director.
______
By Ms. MIKULSKI:
S. 2914. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
incentives for alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles; to the
Committee on Finance.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Common
Sense Automobile Affordability Act Of 2004''. My colleagues from
Maryland introduced a similar bill in the House. I believe in energy
conservation. I also believe in job conservation. We can improve the
fuel efficiency of our cars without sticking a knife through the hearts
of our Nation's auto workers. That is what I am going to keep standing
up for in the U.S. Senate.
When I consider any energy proposal, I apply four criteria. First,
the proposal must achieve real savings in oil consumption. Secondly,
the proposal also must preserve U.S. jobs. Next, the proposal must be
realizable and achievable. And, lastly, it must create incentives to
help companies achieve these goals.
I agree with the goals of energy efficient vehicle tax breaks--fuel
efficiency and energy conservation. I believe we need to reduce our
dependence on foreign oil. The U.S. imports about twenty million
barrels of oil a day, roughly 40 percent of that goes to fuel cars and
light trucks. Half of our oil is imported and a quarter of our oil is
imported from the Persian Gulf. Reducing our dependence on foreign oil
would make us more flexible in the war against terror.
That's why I support the provisions of the energy bill that provide
incentives for energy efficiency and fuel conservation. But, we need to
be more fuel efficient in a way that doesn't cost American jobs.
Our current tax breaks for energy efficient vehicles provides more
help for foreign car manufacturers than U.S. car manufacturers. Small
cars receive more tax breaks, and small cars are often made by foreign
auto companies.
Our current tax breaks penalize U.S. automakers, because current tax
incentives are not geared toward the SUV's or light trucks that
American consumers want and American companies make.
Our domestic automakers have been weakened by the current recession.
And, we can't rely on foreign manufacturers to provide American jobs.
The United Auto Workers (UAW) has seen its membership drop
significantly from 1980 through 2000 from 1.4 million members in 1980
down to 670,000 today. That means that our auto workers are being left
behind.
I have seen it in Baltimore. Over 1,000 workers were recently laid
off at the GM plant, and the plant went through another shutdown after
slow sales. This is not just happening in Maryland. GM shut down
fourteen of its twenty-nine North American assembly plans for at least
a week last year.
American workers are being laid off because, while automobile imports
are rising, and our domestic auto share is falling, only 64 percent of
cars bought in America are built in America. That's down from 73.9
percent in 1994.
We need common sense tax breaks that provide Americans with good
jobs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and help clean up the
environment.
That's why I'm introducing legislation that would repeal the sunsets
on existing clean vehicle tax breaks and replace the existing clean
fuels tax breaks after 2006 with a comprehensive set of new tax credits
of up to $4,000. These tax breaks could be used to buy energy efficient
vehicles, including hybrid vehicles, fuel cell vehicles, diesel ``lean
burn'' vehicles, and alternative fuel vehicles. There are also
additional bonuses for increased fuel conservation and fuel efficiency.
My bill includes incentives for all the major clean fuel technologies.
There are larger credits for trucks and transit buses that are often
American made.
I also support the Hydrogen Fuel Cell Act introduced by my colleague
from North Dakota. This bill would provide research money for a
hydrogen fuel cell vehicle tax research and development programs.
We can have both energy conservation and job conservation. That's
what I'm fighting for. It will take innovative solutions, improved
technology, and the setting of realistic, achievable goals. That's what
my legislation encourages. With the right incentives to increase demand
for cutting edge technologies, to increase U.S. manufacturing capacity
of fuel efficient vehicles, and to provide good paying jobs for
Americans.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting these goals and this
bill.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of my bill be inserted in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2914
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Common
Sense Automobile Efficiency Act of 2004''.
(b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly
provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is
expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a
section or other provision, the reference shall be considered
to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986.
SEC. 2. REPEAL OF PHASEOUTS FOR QUALIFIED ELECTRIC VEHICLE
CREDIT AND DEDUCTION FOR CLEAN-FUEL VEHICLES.
(a) Credit for Qualified Electric Vehicles.--Subsection (b)
of section 30 (relating to limitations) is amended by
striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraph (3) as
paragraph (2).
(b) Deduction for Clean-Fuel Vehicles and Certain Refueling
Property.--Paragraph (1) of section 179A(b) (relating to
qualified clean-fuel vehicle property) is amended to read as
follows:
``(1) Qualified clean-fuel vehicle property.--The cost
which may be taken into account under subsection (a)(1)(A)
with respect to any motor vehicle shall not exceed--
``(A) in the case of a motor vehicle not described in
subparagraph (B) or (C), $2,000,
``(B) in the case of any truck or van with a gross vehicle
weight rating greater than 10,000 pounds but not greater than
26,000 pounds, $5,000, or
``(C) $50,000 in the case of--
``(i) a truck or van with a gross vehicle weight rating
greater than 26,000 pounds, or
``(ii) any bus which has a seating capacity of at least 20
adults (not including the driver).''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
SEC. 3. ALTERNATIVE MOTOR VEHICLE CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 (relating to foreign tax credit, etc.) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``SEC. 30B. ALTERNATIVE MOTOR VEHICLE CREDIT.
``(a) Allowance of Credit.--There shall be allowed as a
credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for the
taxable year an amount equal to the sum of--
``(1) the new qualified fuel cell motor vehicle credit
determined under subsection (b),
``(2) the new advanced lean burn technology motor vehicle
credit determined under subsection (c),
``(3) the new qualified hybrid motor vehicle credit
determined under subsection (d), and
``(4) the new qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle
credit determined under subsection (e).
``(b) New Qualified Fuel Cell Motor Vehicle Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the new
qualified fuel cell motor vehicle credit determined under
this subsection with respect to a new qualified fuel cell
motor vehicle placed in service by the taxpayer during the
taxable year shall be determined in accordance with the
following table:
``In the case of a vehicle which has a gross vehicle wThe new qualified
fuel cell motor
vehicle credit is--
Not more than 8,500 lbs...................................$4,000 ....
More than 8,500 lbs but not more than 14,000 lbs.........$10,000 ....
[[Page S10709]]
More than 14,000 lbs but not more than 26,000 lbs........$20,000 ....
More than 26,000 lbs.....................................$40,000.....
``(2) Increase for fuel efficiency.--
``(A) In general.--The amount determined under paragraph
(1) with respect to a new qualified fuel cell motor vehicle
which is a passenger automobile or light truck shall be
increased by the additional credit amount.
``(B) Additional credit amount.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), the additional credit amount shall be
determined in accordance with the following table:
``In the case of a vehicle which achieves a fuel economy (expressed as
a percentage of the 2002 model year city fuel economy) of--
The additional
credit amount
is--
At least 150 percent but less than 175 percent............$1,000 ....
At least 175 percent but less than 200 percent............$1,500 ....
At least 200 percent but less than 225 percent............$2,000 ....
At least 225 percent but less than 250 percent............$2,500 ....
At least 250 percent but less than 275 percent............$3,000 ....
At least 275 percent but less than 300 percent............$3,500 ....
At least 300 percent......................................$4,000.....
``(3) New qualified fuel cell motor vehicle.--For purposes
of this subsection, the term `new qualified fuel cell motor
vehicle' means a motor vehicle--
``(A) which is propelled by power derived from one or more
cells which convert chemical energy directly into electricity
by combining oxygen with hydrogen fuel which is stored on
board the vehicle in any form and may or may not require
reformation prior to use,
``(B) which, in the case of a passenger automobile or light
truck, has received--
``(i) a certificate of conformity under the Clean Air Act
and meets or exceeds the equivalent qualifying California low
emission vehicle standard under section 243(e)(2) of the
Clean Air Act for that make and model year, and
``(ii) a certificate that such vehicle meets or exceeds the
Bin 5 Tier II emission standard established in regulations
prescribed by the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency under section 202(i) of the Clean Air Act
for that make and model year vehicle,
``(C) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(D) which is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer
and not for resale, and
``(E) which is made by a manufacturer.
``(c) New Advanced Lean Burn Technology Motor Vehicle
Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the new
advanced lean burn technology motor vehicle credit determined
under this subsection with respect to a new advanced lean
burn technology motor vehicle placed in service by the
taxpayer during the taxable year is the credit amount
determined under paragraph (2).
``(2) Credit amount.--
``(A) Fuel economy.--The credit amount determined under
this paragraph shall be determined in accordance with the
following table:
``In the case of a vehicle which achieves a fuel economy (expressed as
a percentage of the 2002 model year city fuel economy) of--
The credit
amount is--
At least 125 percent but less than 150 percent..............$400 ....
At least 150 percent but less than 175 percent..............$800 ....
At least 175 percent but less than 200 percent............$1,200 ....
At least 200 percent but less than 225 percent............$1,600 ....
At least 225 percent but less than 250 percent............$2,000 ....
At least 250 percent......................................$2,400.....
``(B) Conservation credit.--The amount determined under
subparagraph (A) with respect to a new advanced lean burn
technology motor vehicle shall be increased by the
conservation credit amount determined in accordance with the
following table:
``In the case of a vehicle which achieves a lifetime fuel savings
(expressed in gallons of gasoline) of--
The conservation
credit amount
is--
At least 1,200 but less than 1,800..........................$250 ....
At least 1,800 but less than 2,400..........................$500 ....
At least 2,400 but less than 3,000..........................$750 ....
At least 3,000............................................$1,000.....
``(3) New advanced lean burn technology motor vehicle.--For
purposes of this subsection, the term `new advanced lean burn
technology motor vehicle' means a passenger automobile or a
light truck--
``(A) with an internal combustion engine which--
``(i) is designed to operate primarily using more air than
is necessary for complete combustion of the fuel,
``(ii) incorporates direct injection,
``(iii) achieves at least 125 percent of the 2002 model
year city fuel economy, and
``(iv) for 2004 and later model vehicles, has received a
certificate that such vehicle meets or exceeds--
``(I) in the case of a vehicle having a gross vehicle
weight rating of 6,000 pounds or less, the Bin 5 Tier II
emission standard established in regulations prescribed by
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
under section 202(i) of the Clean Air Act for that make and
model year vehicle, and
``(II) in the case of a vehicle having a gross vehicle
weight rating of more than 6,000 pounds but not more than
8,500 pounds, the Bin 8 Tier II emission standard which is so
established,
``(B) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(C) which is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer
and not for resale, and
``(D) which is made by a manufacturer.
``(4) Lifetime fuel savings.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `lifetime fuel savings' means, in the
case of any new advanced lean burn technology motor vehicle,
an amount equal to the excess (if any) of--
``(A) 120,000 divided by the 2002 model year city fuel
economy for the vehicle inertia weight class, over
``(B) 120,000 divided by the city fuel economy for such
vehicle.
``(d) New Qualified Hybrid Motor Vehicle Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the new
qualified hybrid motor vehicle credit determined under this
subsection with respect to a new qualified hybrid motor
vehicle placed in service by the taxpayer during the taxable
year is the credit amount determined under paragraph (2).
``(2) Credit amount.--
``(A) Credit amount for passenger automobiles and light
trucks.--In the case of a new qualified hybrid motor vehicle
which is a passenger automobile or light truck and which has
a gross vehicle weight rating of not more than 8,500 pounds,
the amount determined under this paragraph is the sum of
the amounts determined under clauses (i) and (ii).
``(i) Fuel economy.--The amount determined under this
clause is the amount which would be determined under
subsection (c)(2)(A) if such vehicle were a vehicle referred
to in such subsection.
``(ii) Conservation credit.--The amount determined under
this clause is the amount which would be determined under
subsection (c)(2)(B) if such vehicle were a vehicle referred
to in such subsection.
``(B) Credit amount for other motor vehicles.--
``(i) In general.--In the case of any new qualified hybrid
motor vehicle to which subparagraph (A) does not apply, the
amount determined under this paragraph is the amount equal to
the applicable percentage of the qualified incremental hybrid
cost of the vehicle as certified under clause (v).
``(ii) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of clause (i),
the applicable percentage is--
``(I) 20 percent if the vehicle achieves an increase in
city fuel economy relative to a comparable vehicle of at
least 30 percent but less than 40 percent,
``(II) 30 percent if the vehicle achieves such an increase
of at least 40 percent but less than 50 percent, and
``(III) 40 percent if the vehicle achieves such an increase
of at least 50 percent.
``(iii) Qualified incremental hybrid cost.--For purposes of
this subparagraph, the qualified incremental hybrid cost of
any vehicle is equal to the amount of the excess of the
manufacturer's suggested retail price for such vehicle over
such price for a comparable vehicle, to the extent such
amount does not exceed--
``(I) $10,000, if such vehicle has a gross vehicle weight
rating of not more than 14,000 pounds,
``(II) $25,000, if such vehicle has a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 14,000 pounds but not more than 26,000
pounds, and
``(III) $40,000, if such vehicle has a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 26,000 pounds.
``(iv) Comparable vehicle.--For purposes of this
subparagraph, the term `comparable vehicle' means, with
respect to any new qualified hybrid motor vehicle, any
vehicle which is powered solely by a gasoline or diesel
internal combustion engine and which is comparable in weight,
size, and use to such vehicle.
``(v) Certification.--A certification described in clause
(i) shall be made by the manufacturer and shall be determined
in accordance with guidance prescribed by the Secretary. Such
guidance shall specify procedures and methods for calculating
fuel economy savings and incremental hybrid costs.
``(3) New qualified hybrid motor vehicle.--For purposes of
this subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `new qualified hybrid motor
vehicle' means a motor vehicle--
``(i) which draws propulsion energy from onboard sources of
stored energy which are both--
``(I) an internal combustion or heat engine using
consumable fuel, and
``(II) a rechargeable energy storage system,
``(ii) which, in the case of a vehicle to which paragraph
(2)(A) applies, has received a certificate of conformity
under the Clean
[[Page S10710]]
Air Act and meets or exceeds the equivalent qualifying
California low emission vehicle standard under section
243(e)(2) of the Clean Air Act for that make and model year,
and
``(I) in the case of a vehicle having a gross vehicle
weight rating of 6,000 pounds or less, the Bin 5 Tier II
emission standard established in regulations prescribed by
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency
under section 202(i) of the Clean Air Act for that make and
model year vehicle, and
``(II) in the case of a vehicle having a gross vehicle
weight rating of more than 6,000 pounds but not more than
8,500 pounds, the Bin 8 Tier II emission standard which is so
established,
``(iii) which has a maximum available power of at least--
``(I) 4 percent in the case of a vehicle to which paragraph
(2)(A) applies,
``(II) 10 percent in the case of a vehicle which has a
gross vehicle weight rating or more than 8,500 pounds and not
than 14,000 pounds, and
``(III) 15 percent in the case of a vehicle in excess of
14,000 pounds,
``(iv) which, in the case of a vehicle to which paragraph
(2)(B) applies, has an internal combustion or heat engine
which has received a certificate of conformity under the
Clean Air Act as meeting the emission standards set in the
regulations prescribed by the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency for 2004 through 2007 model
year diesel heavy duty engines or ottocycle heavy duty
engines, as applicable,
``(v) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(vi) which is acquired for use or lease by the taxpayer
and not for resale, and
``(vii) which is made by a manufacturer.
Such term shall not include any vehicle which is not a
passenger automobile or light truck if such vehicle has a
gross vehicle weight rating of less than 8,500 pounds.
``(B) Consumable fuel.--For purposes of subparagraph
(A)(i)(I), the term `consumable fuel' means any solid,
liquid, or gaseous matter which releases energy when consumed
by an auxiliary power unit.
``(C) Maximum available power.--
``(i) Certain passenger automobiles and light trucks.--In
the case of a vehicle to which paragraph (2)(A) applies, the
term `maximum available power' means the maximum power
available from the rechargeable energy storage system, during
a standard 10 second pulse power or equivalent test, divided
by such maximum power and the SAE net power of the heat
engine.
``(ii) Other motor vehicles.--In the case of a vehicle to
which paragraph (2)(B) applies, the term `maximum available
power' means the maximum power available from the
rechargeable energy storage system, during a standard 10
second pulse power or equivalent test, divided by the
vehicle's total traction power. For purposes of the preceding
sentence, the term `total traction power' means the sum of
the peak power from the rechargeable energy storage system
and the heat engine peak power of the vehicle, except that if
such storage system is the sole means by which the vehicle
can be driven, the total traction power is the peak power of
such storage system.
``(e) New Qualified Alternative Fuel Motor Vehicle
Credit.--
``(1) Allowance of credit.--Except as provided in paragraph
(5), the new qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle credit
determined under this subsection is an amount equal to the
applicable percentage of the incremental cost of any new
qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle placed in service by
the taxpayer during the taxable year.
``(2) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the applicable percentage with respect to any new
qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle is--
``(A) 40 percent, plus
``(B) 30 percent, if such vehicle--
``(i) has received a certificate of conformity under the
Clean Air Act and meets or exceeds the most stringent
standard available for certification under the Clean Air Act
for that make and model year vehicle (other than a zero
emission standard), or
``(ii) has received an order certifying the vehicle as
meeting the same requirements as vehicles which may be sold
or leased in California and meets or exceeds the most
stringent standard available for certification under the
State laws of California (enacted in accordance with a waiver
granted under section 209(b) of the Clean Air Act) for that
make and model year vehicle (other than a zero emission
standard).
For purposes of the preceding sentence, in the case of any
new qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle which has a
gross vehicle weight rating of more than 14,000 pounds, the
most stringent standard available shall be such standard
available for certification on the date of this act.
``(3) Incremental cost.--For purposes of this subsection,
the incremental cost of any new qualified alternative fuel
motor vehicle is equal to the amount of the excess of the
manufacturer's suggested retail price for such vehicle over
such price for a gasoline or diesel fuel motor vehicle of the
same model, to the extent such amount does not exceed--
``(A) $5,000, if such vehicle has a gross vehicle weight
rating of not more than 8,500 pounds,
``(B) $10,000, if such vehicle has a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 8,500 pounds but not more than 14,000
pounds,
``(C) $25,000, if such vehicle has a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 14,000 pounds but not more than 26,000
pounds, and
``(D) $40,000, if such vehicle has a gross vehicle weight
rating of more than 26,000 pounds.
``(4) New qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle.--For
purposes of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--The term `new qualified alternative fuel
motor vehicle' means any motor vehicle--
``(i) which is only capable of operating on an alternative
fuel,
``(ii) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(iii) which is acquired by the taxpayer for use or lease,
but not for resale, and
``(iv) which is made by a manufacturer.
``(B) Alternative fuel.--The term `alternative fuel' means
compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, liquefied
petroleum gas, hydrogen, and any liquid at least 85 percent
of the volume of which consists of methanol.
``(5) Credit for mixed-fuel vehicles.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of a mixed-fuel vehicle
placed in service by the taxpayer during the taxable year,
the credit determined under this subsection is an amount
equal to--
``(i) in the case of a 75/25 mixed-fuel vehicle, 70 percent
of the credit which would have been allowed under this
subsection if such vehicle was a qualified alternative fuel
motor vehicle, and
``(ii) in the case of a 90/10 mixed-fuel vehicle, 90
percent of the credit which would have been allowed under
this subsection if such vehicle was a qualified alternative
fuel motor vehicle.
``(B) Mixed-fuel vehicle.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `mixed-fuel vehicle' means any motor vehicle
described in subparagraph (C) or (D) of paragraph (3),
which--
``(i) is certified by the manufacturer as being able to
perform efficiently in normal operation on a combination of
an alternative fuel and a petroleum-based fuel,
``(ii) either--
``(I) has received a certificate of conformity under the
Clean Air Act, or
``(II) has received an order certifying the vehicle as
meeting the same requirements as vehicles which may be sold
or leased in California and meets or exceeds the low emission
vehicle standard under section 88.105-94 of title 40, Code of
Federal Regulations, for that make and model year vehicle,
``(iii) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(iv) which is acquired by the taxpayer for use or lease,
but not for resale, and
``(v) which is made by a manufacturer.
``(C) 75/25 mixed-fuel vehicle.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `75/25 mixed-fuel vehicle' means a
mixed-fuel vehicle which operates using at least 75 percent
alternative fuel and not more than 25 percent petroleum-based
fuel.
``(D) 90/10 mixed-fuel vehicle.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `90/10 mixed-fuel vehicle' means a
mixed-fuel vehicle which operates using at least 90 percent
alternative fuel and not more than 10 percent petroleum-based
fuel.
``(f) Limitation on Number of New Qualified Hybrid and
Advanced Lean-Burn Technology Vehicles Eligible for Credit.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of a qualified vehicle sold
during the phaseout period, only the applicable percentage of
the credit otherwise allowable under subsection (c) or (d)
shall be allowed.
``(2) Phaseout period.--For purposes of this subsection,
the phaseout period is the period beginning with the second
calendar quarter following the calendar quarter which
includes the first date on which the number of qualified
vehicles manufactured by the manufacturer of the vehicle
referred to in paragraph (1) sold for use in the United
States after the date of the enactment of this section is at
least 80,000.
``(3) Applicable percentage.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the applicable percentage is--
``(A) 50 percent for the first 2 calendar quarters of the
phaseout period,
``(B) 25 percent for the 3d and 4th calendar quarters of
the phaseout period, and
``(C) 0 percent for each calendar quarter thereafter.
``(4) Controlled groups.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of this subsection, all
persons treated as a single employer under subsection (a) or
(b) of section 52 or subsection (m) or (o) of section 414
shall be treated as a single manufacturer.
``(B) Inclusion of foreign corporations.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), in applying subsections (a) and (b) of
section 52 to this section, section 1563 shall be applied
without regard to subsection (b)(2)(C) thereof.
``(5) Qualified vehicle.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `qualified vehicle' means any new qualified hybrid
motor vehicle and any new advanced lean burn technology motor
vehicle.
``(g) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax.--The credit
allowed under subsection (a) for the taxable year shall not
exceed the excess of--
``(1) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(2) the sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and
sections 27 and 30 for the taxable year.
[[Page S10711]]
``(h) Other Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of
this section--
``(1) Motor vehicle.--The term `motor vehicle' has the
meaning given such term by section 30(c)(2).
``(2) Other terms.--The terms `automobile', `passenger
automobile', `light truck', and `manufacturer' have the
meanings given such terms in regulations prescribed by the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for
purposes of the administration of title II of the Clean Air
Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.).
``(3) 2002 model year city fuel economy.--
``(A) In general.--The 2002 model year city fuel economy
with respect to a vehicle shall be determined in accordance
with the following tables:
``(i) In the case of a passenger automobile:
The 2002 model year city
``If vehicle inertia weight class is: fuel economy is:
1,500 or 1,750 lbs......................................45.2 mpg ....
2,000 lbs...............................................39.6 mpg ....
2,250 lbs...............................................35.2 mpg ....
2,500 lbs...............................................31.7 mpg ....
2,750 lbs...............................................28.8 mpg ....
3,000 lbs...............................................26.4 mpg ....
3,500 lbs...............................................22.6 mpg ....
4,000 lbs...............................................19.8 mpg ....
4,500 lbs...............................................17.6 mpg ....
5,000 lbs...............................................15.9 mpg ....
5,500 lbs...............................................14.4 mpg ....
6,000 lbs...............................................13.2 mpg ....
6,500 lbs...............................................12.2 mpg ....
7,000 to 8,500 lbs......................................11.3 mpg.....
``(ii) In the case of a light truck:
The 2002 model year city
``If vehicle inertia weight class is: fuel economy is:
1,500 or 1,750 lbs......................................39.4 mpg ....
2,000 lbs...............................................35.2 mpg ....
2,250 lbs...............................................31.8 mpg ....
2,500 lbs...............................................29.0 mpg ....
2,750 lbs...............................................26.8 mpg ....
3,000 lbs...............................................24.9 mpg ....
3,500 lbs...............................................21.8 mpg ....
4,000 lbs...............................................19.4 mpg ....
4,500 lbs...............................................17.6 mpg ....
5,000 lbs...............................................16.1 mpg ....
5,500 lbs...............................................14.8 mpg ....
6,000 lbs...............................................13.7 mpg ....
6,500 lbs...............................................12.8 mpg ....
7,000 to 8,500 lbs......................................12.1 mpg.....
``(B) Vehicle inertia weight class.--For purposes of
subparagraph (A), the term `vehicle inertia weight class' has
the same meaning as when defined in regulations prescribed by
the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency for
purposes of the administration of title II of the Clean Air
Act (42 U.S.C. 7521 et seq.).
``(4) Fuel economy.--Fuel economy with respect to any
vehicle shall be measured under rules similar to the rules
under section 4064(c).
``(5) Reduction in basis.--For purposes of this subtitle,
if a credit is allowed under this section for any expenditure
with respect to any property, the increase in the basis of
such property which would (but for this paragraph) result
from such expenditure shall be reduced by the amount of the
credit so allowed.
``(6) No double benefit.--The amount of any deduction or
credit allowable under this chapter (other than the credits
allowable under this section and section 30) shall be reduced
by the amount of credit allowed under subsection (a) for such
vehicle for the taxable year.
``(7) Recapture.--The Secretary shall, by regulations,
provide for recapturing the benefit of any credit allowable
under subsection (a) with respect to any property which
ceases to be property eligible for such credit (including
recapture in the case of a lease period of less than the
economic life of a vehicle).
``(8) Property used outside united states, etc., not
qualified.--No credit shall be allowed under subsection (a)
with respect to any property referred to in section 50(b) or
with respect to the portion of the cost of any property taken
into account under section 179.
``(9) Election not to take credit.--No credit shall be
allowed under subsection (a) for any vehicle if the taxpayer
elects to not have this section apply to such vehicle.
``(10) Business carryovers allowed.--If the credit
allowable under subsection (a) for a taxable year exceeds the
limitation under subsection (g) for such taxable year, such
excess (to the extent of the credit allowable with respect to
property subject to the allowance for depreciation) shall be
allowed as a credit carryback and carryforward under rules
similar to the rules of section 39.
``(11) Interaction with motor vehicle safety standards.--
Unless otherwise provided in this section, a motor vehicle
shall not be considered eligible for a credit under this
section unless such vehicle is in compliance with the motor
vehicle safety provisions of sections 30101 through 30169 of
title 49, United States Code.
``(i) Regulations.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall promulgate such
regulations as necessary to carry out the provisions of this
section.
``(2) Determination of motor vehicle eligibility.--The
Secretary, after coordination with the Secretary of
Transportation and the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, shall prescribe such regulations as
necessary to determine whether a motor vehicle meets the
requirements to be eligible for a credit under this section.
``(j) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
property placed in service after--
``(1) in the case of a new qualified alternative fuel motor
vehicle, December 31, 2006,
``(2) in the case of a new advanced lean burn technology
motor vehicle or a new qualified hybrid motor vehicle,
December 31, 2008, and
``(3) in the case of a new qualified fuel cell motor
vehicle, December 31, 2012.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 30(d) (relating to special rules) is amended by
adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
``(5) No double benefit.--No credit shall be allowed under
this section for any motor vehicle for which a credit is also
allowed under section 30B.''.
(2) Section 1016(a) is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of paragraph (27), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (28) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following:
``(29) to the extent provided in section 30B(h)(5).''.
(3) Section 6501(m) is amended by inserting ``30B(h)(9),''
after ``30(d)(4),''.
(4) The table of sections for subpart B of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 30A the following:
``Sec. 30B. Alternative motor vehicle credit.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to property placed in service after the date of
the enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such
date.
(d) Sticker Information Required at Retail Sale.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall issue
regulations under which each qualified vehicle sold at retail
shall display a notice--
(A) that such vehicle is a qualified vehicle, and
(B) that the buyer may not benefit from the credit allowed
under section 30B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 if
such buyer has insufficient tax liability.
(2) Qualified vehicle.--For purposes of paragraph (1), the
term ``qualified vehicle'' means a vehicle with respect to
which a credit is allowed under section 30B of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986.
SEC. 4. SMALL ETHANOL PRODUCER CREDIT.
(a) Allocation of Alcohol Fuels Credit to Patrons of a
Cooperative.--Section 40(g) (relating to definitions and
special rules for eligible small ethanol producer credit) is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Allocation of small ethanol producer credit to
patrons of cooperative.--
``(A) Election to allocate.--
``(i) In general.--In the case of a cooperative
organization described in section 1381(a), any portion of the
credit determined under subsection (a)(3) for the taxable
year may, at the election of the organization, be apportioned
pro rata among patrons of the organization on the basis of
the quantity or value of business done with or for such
patrons for the taxable year.
``(ii) Form and effect of election.--An election under
clause (i) for any taxable year shall be made on a timely
filed return for such year. Such election, once made, shall
be irrevocable for such taxable year.
``(B) Treatment of organizations and patrons.--The amount
of the credit apportioned to patrons under subparagraph (A)--
``(i) shall not be included in the amount determined under
subsection (a) with respect to the organization for the
taxable year, and
``(ii) shall be included in the amount determined under
subsection (a) for the taxable year of each patron for which
the patronage dividends for the taxable year described in
subparagraph (A) are included in gross income.
``(C) Special rule.--If the amount of a credit which has
been apportioned to any patron under this paragraph is
decreased for any reason--
``(i) such amount shall not increase the tax imposed on
such patron, and
``(ii) the tax imposed by this chapter on such organization
shall be increased by such amount.
[[Page S10712]]
The increase under clause (ii) shall not be treated as tax
imposed by this chapter for purposes of determining the
amount of any credit under this chapter or for purposes of
section 55.''.
(b) Definition of Small Ethanol Producer.--Section 40(g)
(relating to definitions and special rules for eligible small
ethanol producer credit) is amended by striking
``30,000,000'' each place it appears and inserting
``60,000,000''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Section 1388 (relating to
definitions and special rules for cooperative organizations)
is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(k) Cross Reference.--
``For provisions relating to the apportionment of the alcohol fuels
credit between cooperative organizations and their patrons, see section
40(g)(6).''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2003.
SEC. 5. INCENTIVES FOR BIODIESEL.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 (relating to business related credits) is amended
by inserting after section 40 the following new section:
``SEC. 40A. BIODIESEL USED AS FUEL.
``(a) General Rule.--For purposes of section 38, the
biodiesel fuels credit determined under this section for the
taxable year is an amount equal to the sum of--
``(1) the biodiesel mixture credit, plus
``(2) the biodiesel credit.
``(b) Definition of Biodiesel Mixture Credit and Biodiesel
Credit.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Biodiesel mixture credit.--
``(A) In general.--The biodiesel mixture credit of any
taxpayer for any taxable year is 50 cents for each gallon of
biodiesel used by the taxpayer in the production of a
qualified biodiesel mixture.
``(B) Qualified biodiesel mixture.--The term `qualified
biodiesel mixture' means a mixture of biodiesel and a taxable
fuel (within the meaning of section 4083(a)(1)) which--
``(i) is sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any
person for use as a fuel, or
``(ii) is used as a fuel by the taxpayer producing such
mixture.
``(C) Sale or use must be in trade or business, etc.--
Biodiesel used in the production of a qualified biodiesel
mixture shall be taken into account--
``(i) only if the sale or use described in subparagraph (B)
is in a trade or business of the taxpayer, and
``(ii) for the taxable year in which such sale or use
occurs.
``(D) Casual off-farm production not eligible.--No credit
shall be allowed under this section with respect to any
casual off-farm production of a qualified biodiesel mixture.
``(2) Biodiesel credit.--
``(A) In general.--The biodiesel credit of any taxpayer for
any taxable year is 50 cents for each gallon of biodiesel
which is not in a mixture and which during the taxable year--
``(i) is used by the taxpayer as a fuel in a trade or
business, or
``(ii) is sold by the taxpayer at retail to a person and
placed in the fuel tank of such person's vehicle.
``(B) User credit not to apply to biodiesel sold at
retail.--No credit shall be allowed under subparagraph (A)(i)
with respect to any biodiesel which was sold in a retail sale
described in subparagraph (A)(ii).
``(3) Credit for agri-biodiesel.--In the case of any
biodiesel which is agri-biodiesel, paragraphs (1)(A) and
(2)(A) shall be applied by substituting `$1.00' for `50
cents'.
``(4) Certification for biodiesel.--No credit shall be
allowed under this section unless the taxpayer obtains a
certification (in such form and manner as prescribed by the
Secretary) from the producer of the biodiesel which
identifies the product produced and the percentage of
biodiesel and agri-biodiesel in the product.
``(c) Coordination With Credit Against Excise Tax.--The
amount of the credit determined under this section with
respect to any biodiesel shall be properly reduced to take
into account any benefit provided with respect to such
biodiesel solely by reason of the application of section
6426.
``(d) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) Biodiesel.--The term `biodiesel' means the monoalkyl
esters of long chain fatty acids derived from plant or animal
matter which meet--
``(A) the registration requirements for fuels and fuel
additives established by the Environmental Protection Agency
under section 211 of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545), and
``(B) the requirements of the American Society of Testing
and Materials D6751.
``(2) Agri-biodiesel.--The term `agri-biodiesel' means
biodiesel derived solely from virgin oils, including esters
derived from virgin vegetable oils from corn, soybeans,
sunflower seeds, cottonseeds, canola, crambe, rapeseeds,
safflowers, flaxseeds, rice bran, and mustard seeds, and from
animal fats.
``(3) Mixture or biodiesel not used as a fuel, etc.--
``(A) Mixtures.--If--
``(i) any credit was determined under this section with
respect to biodiesel used in the production of any qualified
biodiesel mixture, and
``(ii) any person--
``(I) separates the biodiesel from the mixture, or
``(II) without separation, uses the mixture other than as a
fuel,
then there is hereby imposed on such person a tax equal to
the product of the rate applicable under subsection (b)(1)(A)
and the number of gallons of such biodiesel in such mixture.
``(B) Biodiesel.--If--
``(i) any credit was determined under this section with
respect to the retail sale of any biodiesel, and
``(ii) any person mixes such biodiesel or uses such
biodiesel other than as a fuel,
then there is hereby imposed on such person a tax equal to
the product of the rate applicable under subsection (b)(2)(A)
and the number of gallons of such biodiesel.
``(C) Applicable laws.--All provisions of law, including
penalties, shall, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent
with this section, apply in respect of any tax imposed under
subparagraph (A) or (B) as if such tax were imposed by
section 4081 and not by this chapter.
``(4) Pass-thru in the case of estates and trusts.--Under
regulations prescribed by the Secretary, rules similar to the
rules of subsection (d) of section 52 shall apply.
``(e) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
sale or use after December 31, 2005.''.
(b) Credit Treated as Part of General Business Credit.--
Section 38(b) (relating to current year business credit) is
amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (16), by
striking the period at the end of paragraph (17) and
inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(18) the biodiesel fuels credit determined under section
40A(a).''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1)(A) Section 87 is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 87. ALCOHOL AND BIODIESEL FUELS CREDITS.
``Gross income includes--
``(1) the amount of the alcohol fuels credit determined
with respect to the taxpayer for the taxable year under
section 40(a), and
``(2) the biodiesel fuels credit determined with respect to
the taxpayer for the taxable year under section 40A(a).''.
(B) The item relating to section 87 in the table of
sections for part II of subchapter B of chapter 1 is amended
by striking ``fuel credit'' and inserting ``and biodiesel
fuels credits''.
(2) Section 196(c) is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of paragraph (9), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (10) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(11) the biodiesel fuels credit determined under section
40A(a).''.
(3) The table of sections for subpart D of part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by adding after the item
relating to section 40 the following new item:
``Sec. 40A. Biodiesel used as fuel.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to fuel produced, and sold or used, after
December 31, 2003, in taxable years ending after such date.
SEC. 6. ALCOHOL FUEL AND BIODIESEL MIXTURES EXCISE TAX
CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Subchapter B of chapter 65 (relating to
rules of special application) is amended by inserting after
section 6425 the following new section:
``SEC. 6426. CREDIT FOR ALCOHOL FUEL AND BIODIESEL MIXTURES.
``(a) Allowance of Credits.--There shall be allowed as a
credit against the tax imposed by section 4081 an amount
equal to the sum of--
``(1) the alcohol fuel mixture credit, plus
``(2) the biodiesel mixture credit.
``(b) Alcohol Fuel Mixture Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the
alcohol fuel mixture credit is the product of the applicable
amount and the number of gallons of alcohol used by the
taxpayer in producing any alcohol fuel mixture for sale or
use in a trade or business of the taxpayer.
``(2) Applicable amount.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the applicable amount is 52 cents (51 cents in the case of
any sale or use after 2004).
``(B) Mixtures not containing ethanol.--In the case of an
alcohol fuel mixture in which none of the alcohol consists of
ethanol, the applicable amount is 60 cents.
``(3) Alcohol fuel mixture.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `alcohol fuel mixture' means a mixture
of alcohol and a taxable fuel which--
``(A) is sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any
person for use as a fuel,
``(B) is used as a fuel by the taxpayer producing such
mixture, or
``(C) is removed from the refinery by a person producing
such mixture.
``(4) Other definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) Alcohol.--The term `alcohol' includes methanol and
ethanol but does not include--
``(i) alcohol produced from petroleum, natural gas, or coal
(including peat), or
``(ii) alcohol with a proof of less than 190 (determined
without regard to any added denaturants).
Such term also includes an alcohol gallon equivalent of ethyl
tertiary butyl ether or other ethers produced from such
alcohol.
``(B) Taxable fuel.--The term `taxable fuel' has the
meaning given such term by section 4083(a)(1).
[[Page S10713]]
``(5) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to any
sale, use, or removal for any period after December 31, 2010.
``(c) Biodiesel Mixture Credit.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the
biodiesel mixture credit is the product of the applicable
amount and the number of gallons of biodiesel used by the
taxpayer in producing any biodiesel mixture for sale or use
in a trade or business of the taxpayer.
``(2) Applicable amount.--For purposes of this subsection--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the applicable amount is 50 cents.
``(B) Amount for agri-biodiesel.--In the case of any
biodiesel which is agri-biodiesel, the applicable amount is
$1.00.
``(3) Biodiesel mixture.--For purposes of this section, the
term `biodiesel mixture' means a mixture of biodiesel and a
taxable fuel which--
``(A) is sold by the taxpayer producing such mixture to any
person for use as a fuel,
``(B) is used as a fuel by the taxpayer producing such
mixture, or
``(C) is removed from the refinery by a person producing
such mixture.
``(4) Certification for biodiesel.--No credit shall be
allowed under this section unless the taxpayer obtains a
certification (in such form and manner as prescribed by the
Secretary) from the producer of the biodiesel which
identifies the product produced and the percentage of
biodiesel and agri-biodiesel in the product.
``(5) Other definitions.--Any term used in this subsection
which is also used in section 40A shall have the meaning
given such term by section 40A.
``(6) Termination.--This subsection shall not apply to any
sale, use, or removal for any period after December 31, 2005.
``(d) Mixture Not Used as a Fuel, Etc.--
``(1) Imposition of tax.--If--
``(A) any credit was determined under this section with
respect to alcohol or biodiesel used in the production of any
alcohol fuel mixture or biodiesel mixture, respectively, and
``(B) any person--
``(i) separates the alcohol or biodiesel from the mixture,
or
``(ii) without separation, uses the mixture other than as a
fuel,
then there is hereby imposed on such person a tax equal to
the product of the applicable amount and the number of
gallons of such alcohol or biodiesel.
``(2) Applicable laws.--All provisions of law, including
penalties, shall, insofar as applicable and not inconsistent
with this section, apply in respect of any tax imposed under
paragraph (1) as if such tax were imposed by section 4081 and
not by this section.
``(e) Coordination With Exemption From Excise Tax.--Rules
similar to the rules under section 40(c) shall apply for
purposes of this section.''.
(b) Registration Requirement.--Section 4101(a) (relating to
registration) is amended by inserting ``and every person
producing biodiesel (as defined in section 40A(d)(1)) or
alcohol (as defined in section 6426(b)(4)(A))'' after
``4091''.
(c) Additional Amendments.--
(1) Section 40(c) is amended by striking ``or section
4091(c)'' and inserting ``section 4091(c), or section 6426''.
(2) Section 40(e)(1) is amended--
(A) by striking ``2007'' in subparagraph (A) and inserting
``2010'', and
(B) by striking ``2008'' in subparagraph (B) and inserting
``2011''.
(3) Section 40(h) is amended--
(A) by striking ``2007'' in paragraph (1) and inserting
``2010'', and
(B) by striking ``, 2006, or 2007'' in the table contained
in paragraph (2) and inserting ``through 2010''.
(4)(A) Subpart C of part III of subchapter A of chapter 32
is amended by adding at the end the following new section:
``SEC. 4104. INFORMATION REPORTING FOR PERSONS CLAIMING
CERTAIN TAX BENEFITS.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall require any person
claiming tax benefits under the provisions of section 34, 40,
40A, 4041(b)(2), 4041(k), 4081(c), 6426, or 6427(f) to file a
quarterly return (in such manner as the Secretary may
prescribe) providing such information relating to such
benefits and the coordination of such benefits as the
Secretary may require to ensure the proper administration and
use of such benefits.
``(b) Enforcement.--With respect to any person described in
subsection (a) and subject to registration requirements under
this title, rules similar to rules of section 4222(c) shall
apply with respect to any requirement under this section.''.
(B) The table of sections for subpart C of part III of
subchapter A of chapter 32 is amended by adding at the end
the following new item:
``Sec. 4104. Information reporting for persons claiming certain tax
benefits.''.
(5) Section 6427(i)(3) is amended--
(A) by adding at the end of subparagraph (A) the following
new flush sentence:
``In the case of an electronic claim, this subparagraph shall
be applied without regard to clause (i).'', and
(B) by striking ``20 days of the date of the filing of such
claim'' in subparagraph (B) and inserting ``45 days of the
date of the filing of such claim (20 days in the case of an
electronic claim)''.
(6) Section 9503(b)(1) is amended by adding at the end the
following new flush sentence:
``For purposes of this paragraph, taxes received under
sections 4041 and 4081 shall be determined without reduction
for credits under section 6426.''.
(d) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for
subchapter B of chapter 65 is amended by inserting after the
item relating to section 6425 the following new item:
``Sec. 6426. Credit for alcohol fuel and biodiesel mixtures.''.
(e) Effective Dates.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraphs (2) and
(3), the amendments made by this section shall apply to fuel
sold, used, or removed after December 31, 2003.
(2) Subsection (c)(4).--The amendments made by subsection
(c)(4) shall take effect on January 1, 2004.
(3) Subsection (c)(5).--The amendments made by subsection
(c)(5) shall apply to claims filed after December 31, 2004.
(f) Format for Filing.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall
prescribe the electronic format for filing claims described
in section 6427(i)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
(as amended by subsection (c)(5)(A)) not later than December
31, 2004.
SEC. 7. NONAPPLICATION OF EXPORT EXEMPTION TO DELIVERY OF
FUEL TO MOTOR VEHICLES REMOVED FROM UNITED
STATES.
(a) In General.--Section 4221(d)(2) (defining export) is
amended by adding at the end the following new sentence:
``Such term does not include the delivery of a taxable fuel
(as defined in section 4083(a)(1)) into a fuel tank of a
motor vehicle which is shipped or driven out of the United
States.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 4041(g) (relating to other exemptions) is
amended by adding at the end the following new sentence:
``Paragraph (3) shall not apply to the sale for delivery of a
liquid into a fuel tank of a motor vehicle which is shipped
or driven out of the United States.''.
(2) Clause (iv) of section 4081(a)(1)(A) (relating to tax
on removal, entry, or sale) is amended by inserting ``or at a
duty-free sales enterprise (as defined in section 555(b)(8)
of the Tariff Act of 1930)'' after ``section 4101''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to sales or deliveries made after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. ALLEN:
S. 2918. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
that distributions from an individual retirement plan, a section 401(k)
plan, or a section 403(b) contract shall not be includible in gross
income to the extent used to pay long-term care insurance premiums; to
the Committee on Finance.
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise to bring the Senate's attention to a
bill I introduced today, the Long-Term Care Act of 2004.
Baby boomers will begin to turn 65 years old in 2010 and by 2030, all
77 million baby boomers will have reached retirement age and the over
65 population will have doubled. The practicality of these conditions
will require the Federal Government and most State governments to spend
more money on health care. Presently, Federal and State governments are
spending billions of dollars to ensure the health and well being of our
fellow citizens.
In one sector of the health care arena where costs are dramatically
rising is in the area of long-term care. In 2000, spending on long-term
care was estimated at $123.1 billion and it is expected to triple to
$346.1 billion by 2040. Currently, 70 percent of long-term care costs
are spent on nursing home care. The average cost of nursing home care
is $178 per day or $60,000 per year. That is a significant burden on
Federal and State governments as well as the thousands of individuals
who pay for that care out of pocket.
In addition, almost 75 percent of nursing home care is publicly
funded. Medicaid spends about 58.7 percent on long-term care while
Medicare spends 14.7 percent. According to the Council for Affordable
Health Insurance, by the year 2030, Medicaid's nursing home
expenditures are expected to reach $130 billion a year.
If more people purchased private long-term care insurance, we could
reduce Medicaid's future institutional-care expenses by more than $40
billion each year, while giving those who are insured alternatives to
nursing homes: including home care, adult day care, foster care and
assisted living. Congress has taken steps to give individuals more
power to pay for their health care services such as long-term care. One
such outstanding measure was the creation of Health Savings Accounts
(HSAs).
Last year, I was pleased to support the passage of the Medicare
Modernization Act. This landmark legislation
[[Page S10714]]
created Health Savings Accounts, which are a new way that people can
pay for unreimbursed medical expenses such as deductibles, co-payments,
and services not covered by insurance like long-term care. Eligible
individuals can establish and fund these accounts when they have a
qualifying high deductible health plan and no other health plan, with
some exceptions. The beauty of these plans is that they have tax
advantages such as deductible contributions; tax-exempt withdrawals if
the individual uses the money for medical expenses; and tax-exempt
account earnings.
I am confident that with the creation of Health Savings Accounts,
individuals and families will be encouraged to set money aside for
their health care expenses and give individuals the means to pay for
health care services of their own choosing, without being constrained
by insurers or employers. Unfortunately, Health Savings Accounts are
relatively new and most individuals will not have the built up funds in
their HSA to pay for a number of costly health care expenses such as
long-term care insurance and that is why we need to provide other
options to help pay for this important investment.
Currently, thousands of Virginians and millions of Americans are
saving in their retirement plans to have a comfortable life once they
become seniors, be it IRA, 401(k), and 403(b) accounts. These savings
plans help prepare individuals for their future retirement or any
unforeseen circumstance that may arise. Indeed, over 43 million
Americans own IRAs with total savings of $2.5 trillion, while more than
47 million Americans have 401(k) accounts with $1.8 trillion saved. In
addition, 6.4 million Americans have 403(b) accounts, amounting to over
$590 billion saved.
These are untapped funds that individuals should be allowed to use to
help pay for their future health care needs. Current tax law and some
retirement plans allow individuals, in extreme circumstances, to
withdraw funds from their retirement accounts, but more often than not,
a 10 percent excise tax applies for early withdrawal. In my opinion,
that tax precludes the ability or desirability of individuals to
provide for their and their families well-being and that is why I have
introduced legislation to provide a new health care option to help
address this unfortunate circumstance.
My legislation, the Long-Term Care Act of 2004 will allow individuals
to use their IRAs, 401(k), and 403(b) plans to purchase long-term care
insurance with pretax dollars at any age and without early withdrawal
penalty. Under the Long-Term Care Act, the consumer has the option to
purchase long-term care insurance at the most appropriate amounts for
their own needs and their spouses.
Today, only six percent of Americans own a long-term care policy. One
of the reasons behind this dismally low figure is that individuals wait
too long to purchase long-term care insurance. In fact, purchasing
long-term care insurance at age 65 is about twice expensive as
purchasing it age 55. That is why we must encourage individuals to plan
for their future health care needs and purchase long-term care
insurance at an early age. By purchasing long-term care insurance at a
younger age, individuals will be saving money in the long run and not
depleting their life savings.
Our country is heading towards a demographic melt down on long-term
care costs. It is simply unsustainable for individuals and the
government to maintain the current rate of spending without further
endangering the state of health care in the United States.
Preparing for future costs of health care is something that every
American should be doing. Long-term care insurance is one way for
Americans to plan for periods of extended disability without burdening
their families, going bankrupt or relying on government assistance.
Every American should be preparing for future health care costs and
it is important that we encourage people to take responsibility today
for those costs, be it with the purchase of long-term care insurance or
investment in a Health Savings Account. If Virginians and Americans
fail to act, it will result in an increased and unsustainable financial
burden on the Federal Government and taxpayers.
My legislation, the Long-Term Care Act of 2004, is a commonsense
approach that will encourage individuals to plan for their future
health care needs and help make long-term care insurance more
affordable. While this may not be the solution for some people, it is
another option for the millions of Virginians and Americans to help
provide for their health and well-being or the health and well-being of
loved ones. I look forward to the Senate's action on this legislation
early on in the 109th Congress because it not only encourages Americans
to plan for their future health needs but will also help sustain the
viability of our Nation's health care system.
______
By Mr. BAUCUS (for himself and Mr. Daschle):
S. 2919. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
funding for Indian tribal prison facilities, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BAUCUS. Mr. President, I rise today to talk about a crisis
occurring today in Indian country--and offer a solution. This crisis is
not something new. It has been decades in the making. For too long we
have neglected to adequately address this issue. This crisis is the
condition of Indian jails.
We held a hearing on the Finance Committee this fall to bring
attention to the problem. We heard testimony from the Inspector General
of the Interior Department, Mr. Earl Devaney. He issued a report that
was absolutely shocking. Mr. Devaney said the conditions of Indian
jails are comparable to conditions found in third-world countries. He
said the jails are a natural disgrace.
There are over seventy Indian jails in America. Almost all of them
suffer from the same problems. They are highly understaffed and
overpopulated. There are extremely high rates of suicides and escapes.
Officers are undertrained or not trained at all. Many of these jails
don't even have locking doors. We are talking about jails used to
detain criminals and they don't have locking doors. These conditions
are unacceptable. They must be fixed. It is our duty to address this
problem.
In my home State of Montana, we have eleven Indian jails. They are
staffed with hardworking, good people. But they are not miracle
workers. They cannot be faulted for the deplorable condition of their
jails. Let me give you are example.
On one day in June of 2002, nine of the eleven Montana Indian jails
were overpopulated. The Crow Indian jail was 429 percent overcapacity.
At the Blackfeet Indian jail, every single detention officer was
assaulted last year.
One major reason these jails are in such poor condition is they are
terribly underfunded. Tribal officers don't have the money to address
the problems. Their hands are tied. We can do something about this. We
must provide adequate funding for Indian jails.
Today I offer a proposal to the Senate to give tribes the authority
to issue tax credit bonds for the construction, maintenance, and
operation of their detention facilities. These bonds give off tax
credits rather than interest to their investors, allowing tribes with
little resources to earn interest off the proceeds. The bonds will
provide a steady stream of income to the Tribal governments.
The legislation will provide money that is so desperately needed to
address the problems facing Indian jails. I urge my colleagues to
support this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the text of this
bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2919
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CREDIT TO HOLDERS OF INDIAN TRIBAL PRISON FACILITY
BONDS.
(a) In General.--Part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to credits
against tax) is amended by adding at the end the following
new subpart:
``Subpart H--Nonrefundable Credit for Holders of Indian Tribal Prison
Facility Bonds
``Sec. 54. Credit to holders of Indian tribal prison facility bonds.
``SEC. 54. CREDIT TO HOLDERS OF INDIAN TRIBAL PRISON FACILITY
BONDS.
``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of a taxpayer who
holds an Indian tribal prison
[[Page S10715]]
facility bond on a credit allowance date of such bond which
occurs during the taxable year, there shall be allowed as a
credit against the tax imposed by this chapter for such
taxable year an amount equal to the sum of the credits
determined under subsection (b) with respect to credit
allowance dates during such year on which the taxpayer holds
such bond.
``(b) Amount of Credit.--
``(1) In general.--The amount of the credit determined
under this subsection with respect to any Indian tribal
prison facility bond is the amount equal to the product of--
``(A) the credit rate determined by the Secretary under
paragraph (2) for the month in which such bond was issued,
multiplied by
``(B) the face amount of the bond held by the taxpayer on
the credit allowance date.
``(2) Determination.--During each calendar month, the
Secretary shall determine a credit rate which shall apply to
bonds issued during the following calendar month. The credit
rate for any month is the percentage which the Secretary
estimates will permit the issuance of Indian tribal prison
facility bonds without discount and without interest cost to
the issuer.
``(c) Limitation Based on Amount of Tax.--The credit
allowed under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not
exceed the excess of--
``(1) the sum of the regular tax liability (as defined in
section 26(b)) plus the tax imposed by section 55, over
``(2) the sum of the credits allowable under this part
(other than this subpart and subpart C).
``(d) Credit Included in Gross Income.--Gross income
includes the amount of the credit allowed to the taxpayer
under this section (determined without regard to subsection
(c)) and the amount so included shall be treated as interest
income.
``(e) Indian Tribal Prison Facility Bond.--For purposes of
this part, the term `Indian tribal prison facility bond'
means any bond issued as part of an issue if--
``(1) 95 percent or more of the proceeds of such issue are
to be invested in investment grade obligations and the
proceeds from such investment are used for the construction,
acquisition, rehabilitation, expansion, or operating expanses
of a qualified Indian tribal prison facility,
``(2) the bond is issued by the Indian tribe within the
jurisdiction of which such facility is located,
``(3) the bond is issued pursuant to a plan developed by
the Indian tribe,
``(4) the issuer designates such bond for purposes of this
section,
``(5) the term of each bond which is part of such issue
does not exceed 10 years, and
``(6) no amount of proceeds of such issue (including
proceeds from any investment under paragraph (1)) may be used
to pay the costs of issuance to the extent such amount
exceeds 2 percent of the sale proceeds of such issue.
``(f) Qualified Indian Tribal Prison Facility.--For
purposes of this section, the term `qualified Indian tribal
prison facility' means any residential correctional or
detention facility located on the qualified Indian land of
the issuing Indian tribe substantially all of the inmates of
which are adult or juvenile members of such Indian tribe.
``(g) Limitation on Amount of Bonds Designated; Allocation
of Bonds.--
``(1) National limitation.--There is an Indian tribal
prison facility bond limitation for each calendar year. Such
limitation is--
``(A) $200,000,000 for 2005,
``(B) $200,000,000 for 2006,
``(C) $200,000,000 for 2007, and
``(D) except as provided in paragraph (3), zero thereafter.
``(2) Allocation of bonds.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary, after consultation with
the Secretary of the Interior, shall allocate the Indian
tribal prison facility bond limitation among those Indian
tribes which submit a plan which contains a description of
the proposed use of investment proceeds, assurances that such
proceeds will be used only for such use, a proposed
expenditure schedule, information relevant to the criteria
described in subparagraph (B), and any other information
determined appropriate by the Secretary.
``(B) Approval criteria.--In allocating the limitation
among plan requests of Indian tribes under subparagraph (A),
the Secretary shall consider--
``(i) the percentage of prison overcrowding in excess of
the facility occupancy level as determined by the Bureau of
Indian Affairs,
``(ii) the condition of existing facilities,
``(iii) the health and safety of both inmates and prison
employees,
``(iv) the type of offenders incarcerated, and
``(v) other financial resources available to the Indian
tribe.
``(3) Carryover of unused issuance limitation.--If for any
calendar year the limitation amount imposed by paragraph (1)
exceeds the amount of Indian tribal prison facility bonds
issued during such year, such excess shall be carried forward
to one or more succeeding calendar years as an addition to
the limitation imposed by paragraph (1) and until used by
issuance of such bonds.
``(h) Other Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of
this section--
``(1) Credit allowance date.--The term `credit allowance
date' means, with respect to any issue, the last day of the
1-year period beginning on the date of the issuance of such
issue and the last day of each successive 1-year period
thereafter.
``(2) Bond.--The term `bond' includes any obligation.
``(3) Indian tribe.--The term `Indian tribe' has the
meaning given such term by section 7871(c)(3)(E)(ii).
``(4) Qualified Indian lands.--The term `qualified Indian
lands' has the meaning given such term by section
7871(c)(3)(E)(i).
``(5) Partnership; s corporation; and other pass-thru
entities.--In the case of a partnership, trust, S
corporation, or other pass-thru entity, rules similar to the
rules of section 41(g) shall apply with respect to the credit
allowable under subsection (a).
``(6) Bonds held by regulated investment companies.--If any
Indian tribal prison facility bond is held by a regulated
investment company, the credit determined under subsection
(a) shall be allowed to shareholders of such company under
procedures prescribed by the Secretary.
``(7) Reporting.--Each Indian tribe with an allocation of
Indian tribal prison facility bonds under an approved plan
shall submit reports similar to the reports required under
section 149(e).''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Reporting.--Subsection (d) of section 6049 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to returns regarding
payments of interest) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
``(8) Reporting of credit on indian tribal prison facility
bonds.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a), the term
`interest' includes amounts includible in gross income under
section 54(d) and such amounts shall be treated as paid on
the credit allowance date (as defined in section 54(h)(1)).
``(B) Reporting to corporations, etc.--Except as otherwise
provided in regulations, in the case of any interest
described in subparagraph (A), subsection (b)(4) shall be
applied without regard to subparagraphs (A), (H), (I), (J),
(K), and (L)(i) of such subsection.
``(C) Regulatory authority.--The Secretary may prescribe
such regulations as are necessary or appropriate to carry out
the purposes of this paragraph, including regulations which
require more frequent or more detailed reporting.''.
(2) Treatment for estimated tax purposes.--
(A) Individual.--Section 6654 of such Code (relating to
failure by individual to pay estimated income tax) is amended
by redesignating subsection (m) as subsection (n) and by
inserting after subsection (l) the following new subsection:
``(m) Special Rule for Holders of Indian Tribal Prison
Facility Bonds.--For purposes of this section, the credit
allowed by section 54 to a taxpayer by reason of holding an
Indian tribal prison facility bond on a credit allowance date
shall be treated as if it were a payment of estimated tax
made by the taxpayer on such date.''.
(B) Corporate.--Subsection (g) of section 6655 of such Code
(relating to failure by corporation to pay estimated income
tax) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(5) Special rule for holders of indian tribal prison
facility bonds.--For purposes of this section, the credit
allowed by section 54 to a taxpayer by reason of holding an
Indian tribal prison facility bond on a credit allowance date
shall be treated as if it were a payment of estimated tax
made by the taxpayer on such date.''.
(c) Clerical Amendments.--
(1) The table of subparts for part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
adding at the end the following new item:
``Subpart H. Nonrefundable Credit for Holders of Indian Tribal Prison
Facility Bonds.''.
(2) Section 6401(b)(1) of such Code is amended by striking
``and G'' and inserting ``G, and H''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to obligations issued after December 31, 2004.
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, today I am pleased to join Senator Max
Baucus in introducing legislation that addresses the longstanding
problem of dilapidated tribal detention facilities on Indian
reservations. There is a tremendous need for replacement construction
of Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) operated and funded facilities, and I
am pleased that this legislation offers a creative and innovative
bonding approach to address the construction backlog.
USA Today reported that Federal investigators have uncovered evidence
of abuse, neglect and inhumane conditions in Native American prisons
and jails. This troubling report suggests that the conditions in Indian
detention facilities are not improving and, in fact, appear to be
getting worse. It is my hope that this hearing will help shed
additional light on these allegations, and lead to solutions to improve
conditions in facilities across Indian country.
According to recent statistics from the Department of Justice report
on Indian jails and prisons, there are 70 detention facilities in
Indian country, supervising approximately 2,100 inmates. Many of these
facilities are in
[[Page S10716]]
an appalling state of disrepair, and face problems that range from
overcrowding and understaffing to sheer neglect and abuse.
According to the most recent statistics from the Department of
Justice, over half of all detention facilities in Indian country were
operating at 100-percent capacity in 2002, and nineteen were operating
at 150-percent or higher capacity. Of those nineteen, three are located
in my state of South Dakota: Pine Ridge's Medicine Root Detention
Center, operating at 250-percent capacity; Crow Creek's Fort Thompson
Jail, operating at 242-percent capacity; and the Pine Ridge
Correctional Facility, which is operating at a staggering 400 percent
of its capacity.
Inmates in South Dakota's BIA facilities are housed in dilapidated
buildings and are forced to endure extraordinarily harsh conditions.
Even though the Lower Brule tribal detention facility was condemned by
the BIA in 1987, it was still being used to house inmates as recently
as two years ago. Because the new facility is still under construction,
Lower Brule prisoners are sent 13 miles away, across the Missouri
River, to the Crow Creek facility in Fort Thompson. Because there
aren't enough BIA officers to transport them back to Lower Brule,
detainees released from Crow Creek are often forced to make the return
trip to Lower Brule on foot. It is shocking that this is allowed to
happen at all, but especially in South Dakota where harsh winters and
sub-zero temperatures are routine. Moreover, the Fort Thompson facility
is equally understaffed. One person serves as both police dispatcher
and detention officer in a facility that houses up to 30 prisoners.
These conditions have a devastating impact on prisoners. Nationally,
between July 1, 2001, and June 30, 2002, 282 inmates in tribal jails
attempted suicide, up from 169 the previous year. In the last
five years, the number of admissions rose 32 percent, and the annual
number of attempted suicides more than doubled, from 133 to 282. On
Crow Creek, which is located in one of the most impoverished counties
in the U.S. and experiences inordinate suicide rates among its general
population, several suicides have occurred in the local jail.
Even more troubling, inadequate detention facilities pose a serious
threat to the surrounding communities. With a limited number of
officers responsible for large inmate populations, the risk of prisoner
violence--against both prison staff and, in the event of an escape,
local citizens--is much greater. Moreover, the culture of neglect and
abuse found in many of our Indian jails is indicative of broader trends
within the communities. The Lower Brule jail doubles as a suicide-watch
center for troubled teens, since there is nowhere else in the community
to take them. Several Emergency Medical Technicians (EMTs) have either
resigned, or are on the brink of resigning, due to the stress of the
situation. Law enforcement officials are at a loss about how to address
this disturbing pattern, and are overwhelmed by the feelings of
hopelessness that accompany it.
Clearly, the impact that overcrowding, dilapidated conditions, and
neglect are having on inmates in these facilities, as well as local
communities, is reaching a critical mass--both in South Dakota and
across the Nation--and we must act now to reverse the trend. While
addressing the problems that exist in jails and prisons clearly isn't
the whole answer, such an approach will meet a critical need in Indian
country, and will represent an important step toward increasing public
safety and reducing incidences of abuse and neglect.
We can start by increasing funding for BIA facilities. Unfortunately,
this Administration has demonstrated a complete unwillingness to give
Indian detention facilities the resources they need, and has actually
reduced funding for jails and prisons in Indian country. It wasn't
always so bad. Under the Clinton Administration, then-Attorney General
Janet Reno created the Department of Justice--Department of Interior
Indian Law Enforcement initiative with the objective of creating an
effective way to address law enforcement, facilities, juvenile justice,
and rehabilitation efforts in Indian country. Although funding for
these programs, which increased under the Clinton administration and
was consistent until the FY2002 appropriations cycle, was not enough to
meet all of Indian country's needs, the initiative represented an
unprecedented step toward addressing some of these problems.
Unfortunately, the current Administration, while budgeting hundreds
of millions of dollars for Federal prison construction, has proposed
eliminating the tribal facility program for the second year in a row.
While Congress appropriated $35 million per year for construction of
BIA detention facilities between 2000 and 2002, we appropriated only $2
million in FY2004. Now, with an even tighter budget to work with, the
outlook for this year is especially bleak, and conditions at BIA
facilities are likely to get even worse.
For too long, we have neglected our obligations to Native Americans.
We are seeing the effects of that neglect in South Dakota. These are
once again examples of the abrogration of the trust responsibility by
the Federal Government to the tribes and its people.
We need to do a better job of funding Indian detention centers, and
we need to do more to address public safety, tribal courts, and
rehabilitation efforts. We cannot ask tribes to choose between funding
crisis intervention and law enforcement. We cannot force tribes to make
the choice between funding education and after school programs for
their children, and repairing cracked walls and inoperable surveillance
cameras in their jails.
While national rates are the lowest in years, crime on Indian lands
continues to rise. Particularly disturbing is the violent nature of
this crime; violence against women, juvenile and gang crime, and child
abuse remain serious problems. The Bureau of Justice Statistics reports
that American Indians experience the highest crime victimization rates
in the nation--almost twice the national average.
The law enforcement, public safety, and tribal detention facility
issues are of critical importance to Indian country and surrounding
communities. If this were happening in any other part of the country,
it would be met with public outrage and swift government action.
However, in Indian country, it is met with silence and reduced funding.
For the safety of our Indian people and the well-being of their
communities, we must take action.
I am pleased that on September 21, 2004, the Senate Finance Committee
held an oversight hearing on these issues, and that this legislation
has emerged as a step in the right direction to address the
construction backlog of much-needed facilities in rural, tribal
communities.
I support this legislation which authorizes eligible Indian tribes to
issue tax-exempt bonds to finance tribal prison facilities, ``tribal
prison facility bonds''. I look forward to working with my colleagues
to address these important issues and to advance this legislation.
______
By Mr. CORNYN:
S. 2922. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for
the expansion, intensification, and coordination of the activities of
the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute with respect to research
on pulmonary hypertension; to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
designed to enhance Federal research on an emerging chronic disease in
the U.S. known as pulmonary hypertension. PH is a serious and often
fatal condition where the blood pressure in the lungs rises to
dangerously high levels. In PH patients, the walls of the arteries that
take blood from the right side of the heart to the lungs thicken and
constrict. As a result, the right side of the heart has to pump harder
to move blood into the lungs, causing it to enlarge and ultimately
fail.
PH can occur without a known cause or be secondary to other
conditions such as; collagen vascular diseases, i.e., scleroderma and
lupus, blood clots, HIV, sickle cell, and liver disease. PH does not
discriminate based on race, gender or age. Patients develop symptoms of
shortness of breath, fatigue, chest pain, dizziness, and fainting.
Unfortunately, these symptoms are frequently misdiagnosed, leaving
patients
[[Page S10717]]
with the false impression that they have a minor pulmonary or
cardiovascular condition. By the time many patients receive an accurate
diagnosis, the disease has progressed to a late stage, making it
impossible to receive a necessary heart or lung transplant.
With this legislation, I am proud to join the Pulmonary Hypertension
Association in the fight against this deadly illness. PHA is the
Nation's oldest and largest organization dedicated to finding a cure
for PH and improving the quality of life for PH patients and their
families. I would particularly like to recognize the contributions of
four PHA members from my home State of Texas who have contributed so
much to this worthy cause--Leo and Bobbie Fields, and Jack Stibbs and
his daughter Emily. Their commitment to improving the quality of life
for PH patients and pursuing a cure for this disease is truly
inspiring. I would also like to recognize our colleague Congressman
Kevin Brady for his leadership in introducing the ``PH Research Act''
in the other body.
A few years ago the scientifc community discovered the first gene
associated with pulmonary hypertension. This was a landmark discovery
in the battle to unravel the mystery surrounding this disease. The ``PH
Research Act'' seeks to capitalize on this exciting advancement by
establishing ``Centers of Excellence'' on pulmonary hypertension
through the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute at the National
Institutes of Health. These Centers would focus on: 1. basic and
clinical research into the cause, diagnosis, and treatment of PH: 2.
the training of new investigators in PH research; 3. continuing
education for health care professionals regarding PH with a focus on
early diagnosis and 4. the dissemination of information regarding the
disease to the general public.
This is an important bill that has the potential to help tens of
thousands of Americans and their families, who are struggling with this
devastating disease. I look forward to working with the Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions Committee to advance the ``PH Research
Act.''
______
By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Bingaman, and Ms.
Landrieu):
S. 2923. A bill to reauthorize the grant program of the Department of
Justice for reentry of offenders into the community, to establish a
task force on Federal programs and activities relating to the reentry
of offenders into the community, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, Senator Specter and I introduce today the
Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004, which takes direct aim at reducing
recidivism rates for our Nation's ex-offenders and improving the
transition for these offenders from prison back into the community.
All too often we think about today, but not tomorrow. We look to
short-term solutions for long- term problems. We need to have a change
in thinking and approach. It's time we face the dire situation of
prisoners reentering our communities with insufficient monitoring,
little or no job skills, inadequate drug treatment, insufficient
housing, lack of positive influences, a paucity of basic physical and
mental health services, and deficient basic life skills.
The bill we introduce today is about providing a second chance for
these ex-offenders, and the children and families that depend on them.
It's about strengthening communities and ensuring safe neighborhoods.
Since my 1994 Crime Bill passed, we've had great success in cutting
down on crime rates in this country. Under the Community Oriented
Policing Services (COPS) program, we've funded over 114,000 officers
all across the country. And our crime rate has plummeted. Murder is
down 37.8 percent, rape 19.1 percent, and aggravated assaults 28
percent. The overall crime rate sharply declined by 28 percent.
But now, we are seeing some troubling indicators that crime is back
on the rise. Murder was up 2.5 percent in 2001, 1 percent in 2002, and
1.3 percent in 2003. Forcible rape is up as is robbery. Car theft is up
10 percent over the last four years.
If we are going to ensure that these latest numbers are only a blip
on the continued downward trend of crime rates, as opposed to the
beginning of a comeback in crime, we simply have to make strong,
concerted, and common-sense efforts now to help ex-prisoners
successfully reenter and reintegrate into their communities.
There's a record number of people currently serving time in our
country--over two million. This translates into 1 out of every 143 U.S.
residents. In its latest statistics on the matter, the Bureau of
Justice Statistics found that the Nation's overall prison population
increased by over 40,000 from midyear 2002 to midyear 2003, the largest
increase in 4 years.
Also vital to realize is that 95 percent of all these millions we
lock up will eventually get out. That equals nearly 650,000 being
released from Federal or State prisons to communities each year. In a
State like Delaware, that's over 4,000 inmates per year. And here's the
kicker--a staggering \2/3\ of these released state prisoners are
expected to be rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3
years of release. Two out of every three! You're talking about hundreds
of thousands of reoffending ex-offenders each year and hundreds of
thousands of serious crimes being committed by people who have already
served time in jail.
And, unfortunately, it's not too difficult to see why such a huge
portion of our released prisoners recommit serious crimes. Up to 60
percent of former inmates are not employed; 15 to 27 percent of
prisoners expect to go to homeless shelters upon release; and 57
percent of Federal and 70 percent of State inmates used drugs regularly
before prison, with some estimates of involvement with drugs or alcohol
around the time of the offense as high as 84 percent.
These huge numbers of released prisoners each year and the out-of-
control recidivism rates are a recipe for disaster--leading to untold
damage, hardship, and death for victims; ruined futures and lost
potential for re-offenders; and a huge drain on society at large. One
particularly vulnerable group is the children of these offenders. We
simply cannot be resigned to allowing generation after generation
entering and reentering our prisons. This pernicious cycle must come to
an end.
My 1994 Crime Bill recognized these extraordinarily high rates of
recidivism as a real problem. My bill, for example, created innovative
drug treatment programs for State and Federal inmates to help them kick
their habit.
But this is only one piece of the puzzle. I introduced a bill in 2000
that would have built on my 1994 Crime Bill--the ``Offender Reentry and
Community Safety Act of 2000'', S. 2908. This bill would have created
demonstration reentry programs for Federal, State, and local prisoners.
These programs were designed to assist high-risk, high-need offenders
who served their prison sentences, but who pose the greatest risk of
reoffending upon release because they lack the education, job skills,
stable family or living arrangements, and the health services they need
to successfully reintegrate into society.
Senator Specter has also been a dedicated and tireless leader on
crime and public safety issues throughout his career and has, for many
years, seen the serious public safety ramifications of high recidivism
rates. For example, my colleague from Pennsylvania has been the leader
on the effort to ensure that offenders who are being released back into
our communities have adequate education and work training to become
productive members of our society. I couldn't be more pleased than to
join efforts with Senator Specter on the Enhanced Second Chance Act of
2004.
While we have made some progress on offender reentry efforts since
1994, much more needs to be done. In the current session of Congress, I
am pleased that colleagues of mine--from both sides of Capitol Hill and
from both sides of the aisle--are also focusing their attention on this
vital issue.
I am proud to have worked with Representatives Rob Portman, Danny
Davis, and John Conyers, just to name a few, in the House or
Representatives. In the Senate, a number of my colleagues, in addition
to Senator Specter, have shown strong interest in offender reentry
issues, including Senators Brownback, DeWine, Leahy, Kennedy, Landrieu,
Bingaman, Hatch, Grassley, and Santorum.
[[Page S10718]]
The Second Chance Act of 2004 was introduced in the House and Senate
recently, and I was proud to have worked extensively on that
bipartisan, bicameral process. The bill Senator Specter and I introduce
today builds on those efforts. Like the Second Chance Act, the central
component of our bill provides a competitive grant program to promote
innovative programs to test out a variety of methods aimed at reducing
recidivism rates. Efforts would be focused on post-release housing,
education and job training, substance abuse and mental health services,
and mentoring programs, just to name a few.
Because the scope of the problem is so large--with 650,000 prisoners
being released from state and federal prisons each year--our bill
provides more than three times as much funding than the House bill.
While the House bill contains $40 million per year for the main grant
program, our bill provides $130 million. This isn't being wasteful with
our scarce federal resources, it's just an acknowledgment of the scope
of the problem we're faced with.
A relatively modest investment in offender reentry efforts compares
very well with the alternative, building more and more prisons for
these ex-offenders to return to if they are unable to successfully
reenter their communities and instead are rearrested and reconvicted of
more crimes. We must remember that the average cost of incarcerating
each prisoner exceeds $20,000 per year. In Delaware, this translates
into over $200 per resident just to pay for jail and prison operating
expenses.
In constant 2001 dollars, state prison costs in our country have
increased from $11.7 billion per year in 1986 to $29.5 billion in 2001.
And even with these kinds of resources being spent, by the end of 2002,
25 States and the Federal prison system reported operating at 100
percent or more of their highest capacity. My own home State of
Delaware continues to see a prison system bulging at the seams. We have
tried, but simply cannot build our way out of this problem. We need
tough--but smart--strategies to stop the revolving door of prisoners
being released from prison, only to re-offend and land right back
behind bars. We simply can't be penny-wise but pound-foolish.
The Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004 also requires that Federal
departments with a role in offender reentry efforts coordinate and work
together; to make sure there aren't duplicative efforts or funding
gaps; and to coordinate reentry research. Our bill would raise the
profile of this issue within the executive branch and secure the
sustained and coordinated federal attention offender reentry efforts
deserve.
We also need to examine existing Federal and state reentry barriers--
laws, regulations, rules, and practices that make it more difficult for
former inmates to successfully reintegrate back into their communities;
laws that confine ex-offenders to society's margins, making it even
more likely that they will recommit serious crimes and return to
prison.
Turning over a new leaf and going from a life of crime to becoming a
productive member of society is tough enough. We shouldn't have Federal
and State laws on the books that make this even more challenging.
That's not to say that we don't want to restrict former drug addicts
from working in pharmacies, for example, or to bar sex offenders from
working in day care centers. But many communities across the country
currently exclude ex-prisoners from virtually every occupation
requiring a state license, like chiropractic care, engineering, and
real estate. Lifting these senselessly punitive bans would make it
easier for ex-offenders to stay out of prison.
Our bill provides for a robust analysis of these Federal and State
barriers with recommendations on what next steps we need to take. And
these reviews are mandated to take place out in the open under public
scrutiny.
The Enhanced Second Chance Act also spurs state-of-the-art research
and study on offender reentry issues. We need to know who is most
likely to recommit crimes when they are released, to better target our
limited resources where they can do the most good. We need to study why
some ex-offenders who seem to have the entire deck stacked against them
are able to become successful and productive members of our society. We
need to know what works and how we can replicate what works for others.
Our bill also provides a whole slew of common-sense proposals in the
areas of job training, employment, education, post-release housing,
civic rights, substance abuse, and prisoner mentoring--efforts and
changes in law that we can do now. Some of these important provisions
are included in the House bill, others are in addition to those
efforts, but all are common-sense efforts in the art of the possible.
Our goal is to do as much as possible right now.
Our Enhanced Second Chance Act is a next, natural step in our
campaign against crime. Making a dent in recidivism rates is an
enormous undertaking; one that requires action now and continued focus
in the future. I commit to vigorously pushing this legislation as well
as keeping an eye on what steps we need to take in the future. We need
to realize that the problems facing ex-offenders are enormous and
require sustained focus. The safety of our neighbors, our children, and
our communities depends on it.
I'm proud today to introduce the Enhanced Second Chance Act with
Senator Specter and ask our colleagues to join with us in this vital
effort.
I ask unanimous consent to have the text of our bill printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 2923
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 ``Enhanced Second Chance Act
of 2004: Community Safety Through Recidivism Prevention'' or
the ``Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) In 2002, 2,000,000 people were incarcerated in Federal
or State prisons or in local jails. Nearly 650,000 people are
released from incarceration to communities nationwide each
year.
(2) There are over 3,200 jails throughout the United
States, the vast majority of which are operated by county
governments. Each year, these jails will release in excess of
10,000,000 people back into the community.
(3) Nearly \2/3\ of released State prisoners are expected
to be rearrested for a felony or serious misdemeanor within 3
years after release.
(4) In recent years, a number of States and local
governments have begun to establish improved systems for
reintegrating former prisoners. Under such systems,
corrections officials begin to plan for a prisoner's release
while the prisoner is incarcerated and provide a transition
to needed services in the community.
(5) Faith leaders and parishioners have a long history
helping ex-offenders transform their lives. Through prison
ministries and outreach in communities, churches and faith-
based organizations have pioneered reentry services to
prisoners and their families.
(6) Successful reentry protects those who might otherwise
be crime victims. It also improves the likelihood that
individuals released from prison or juvenile detention
facilities can pay fines, fees, restitution, and family
support.
(7) According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics,
expenditures on corrections alone increased from
$9,000,000,000 in 1982 to $44,000,000,000 in 1997. These
figures do not include the cost of arrest and prosecution,
nor do they take into account the cost to victims.
(8) Increased recidivism results in profound collateral
consequences, including public health risks, homelessness,
unemployment, and disenfranchisement.
(9) The high prevalence of infectious disease, substance
abuse, and mental health disorders that has been found in
incarcerated populations demands that a recovery model of
treatment should be used for handling the more than \2/3\ of
all offenders with such needs.
(10) One of the most significant costs of prisoner reentry
is the impact on children, the weakened ties among family
members, and destabilized communities. The long-term
generational effects of a social structure in which
imprisonment is the norm and law-abiding role models are
absent are difficult to measure but undoubtedly exist.
(11) According to the 2001 national data from the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, 3,500,000 parents were supervised by the
correctional system. Prior to incarceration, 64 percent of
female prisoners and 44 percent of male prisoners in State
facilities lived with their children.
(12) Between 1991 and 1999, the number of children with a
parent in a Federal or State correctional facility increased
by more than 100 percent, from approximately 900,000 to
approximately 2,000,000. According to the Bureau of Prisons,
there is evidence to suggest that inmates who are connected
to their children and families are more likely to avoid
negative incidents and have reduced sentences.
[[Page S10719]]
(13) Approximately 100,000 juveniles (ages 17 and under)
leave juvenile correctional facilities, State prison, or
Federal prison each year. Juveniles released from confinement
still have their likely prime crime years ahead of them.
Juveniles released from secure confinement have a recidivism
rate ranging from 55 to 75 percent. The chances that young
people will successfully transition into society improve with
effective reentry and aftercare programs.
(14) Studies have shown that from 15 percent to 27 percent
of prisoners expect to go to homeless shelters upon release
from prison.
(15) The National Institute of Justice has found that after
1 year of release, up to 60 percent of former inmates are not
employed.
(16) Fifty-seven percent of Federal and 70 percent of State
inmates used drugs regularly before prison, with some
estimates of involvement with drugs or alcohol around the
time of the offense as high as 84 percent (BJS Trends in
State Parole, 1990-2000).
(17) According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, 60 to
83 percent of the Nation's correctional population have used
drugs at some point in their lives. This is twice the
estimated drug use of the total United States population of
40 percent.
(18) Family based treatment programs have proven results
for serving the special population of female offenders and
substance abusers with children. An evaluation by the
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration of
family based treatment for substance abusing mothers and
children found that at 6 months post treatment, 60 percent of
the mothers remain alcohol and drug free, and drug related
offenses declined from 28 to 7 percent. Additionally, a 2003
evaluation of residential family based treatment programs
revealed that 60 percent of mothers remained clean and sober
6 months after treatment, criminal arrests declined by 43
percent, and 88 percent of the children treated in the
program with their mothers remain stabilized.
(19) A Bureau of Justice Statistics analysis indicated that
only 33 percent of Federal and 36 percent of State inmates
had participated in residential inpatient treatment programs
for alcohol and drug abuse 12 months before their release.
Further, over \1/3\ of all jail inmates have some physical or
mental disability and 25 percent of jail inmates have been
treated at some time for a mental or emotional problem.
(20) According to the National Institute of Literacy, 70
percent of all prisoners function at the 2 lowest literacy
levels.
(21) The Bureau of Justice Statistics has found that 27
percent of Federal inmates, 40 percent of State inmates, and
47 percent of local jail inmates have never completed high
school or its equivalent. Furthermore, the Bureau of Justice
Statistics has found that less educated inmates are more
likely to be recidivists. Only 1 in 4 local jails offer basic
adult education programs.
(22) In his 2004 State of the Union Address, President Bush
correctly stated: ``We know from long experience that if
former prisoners can't find work, or a home, or help, they
are much more likely to commit more crimes and return to
prison America is the land of the second chance, and when the
gates of the prison open, the path ahead should lead to a
better life.''.
(23) Participation in State correctional education programs
lowers the likelihood of reincarceration by 29 percent,
according to a recent United States Department of Education
study. A Federal Bureau of Prisons study found a 33 percent
drop in recidivism among Federal prisoners who participated
in vocational and apprenticeship training.
SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION OF ADULT AND JUVENILE OFFENDER STATE
AND LOCAL REENTRY DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS.
(a) Adult Offender Demonstration Projects Authorized.--
Section 2976(b) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3797w(b)) is amended by striking
paragraphs (1) through (4) and inserting the following:
``(1) establishing or improving the system or systems under
which--
``(A) the correctional agency of the State or local
government develops and carries out plans to facilitate the
reentry into the community of each offender in State or local
custody;
``(B) the supervision and services provided to offenders in
State or local custody are coordinated with the supervision
and services provided to offenders after reentry into the
community;
``(C) the efforts of various public and private entities to
provide supervision and services to offenders after reentry
into the community, and to family members of such offenders,
are coordinated; and
``(D) offenders awaiting reentry into the community are
provided with documents (such as identification papers,
referrals to services, medical prescriptions, job training
certificates, apprenticeship papers, and information on
obtaining public assistance) useful in achieving a successful
transition from prison;
``(2) carrying out programs and initiatives by units of
local government to strengthen reentry services for
individuals released from local jails;
``(3) enabling prison mentors of offenders to remain in
contact with those offenders, including through the use of
such technology as videoconferencing, during incarceration
and after reentry into the community and encouraging the
involvement of prison mentors in the reentry process;
``(4) providing structured post-release housing and
transitional housing, including group homes for recovering
substance abusers, through which offenders are provided
supervision and services immediately following reentry into
the community;
``(5) assisting offenders in securing permanent housing
upon release or following a stay in transitional housing;
``(6) providing continuity of health services (including
mental health services, substance abuse treatment and
aftercare, and treatment for contagious diseases) to
offenders in custody and after reentry into the community;
``(7) providing offenders with education, job training,
English as a second language programs, work experience
programs, self-respect and life skills training, and other
skills useful in achieving a successful transition from
prison;
``(8) facilitating collaboration among corrections and
community corrections, technical schools, community colleges,
and the workforce development and employment service sectors
to--
``(A) promote, where appropriate, the employment of people
released from prison and jail, through efforts such as
educating employers about existing financial incentives and
facilitate the creation of job opportunities, including
transitional jobs, for this population that will benefit
communities;
``(B) connect inmates to employment, including supportive
employment and employment services, before their release to
the community;
``(C) address barriers to employment, including licensing;
and
``(D) identify labor market needs to ensure that education
and training are appropriate;
``(9) assessing the literacy and educational needs of
offenders in custody and identifying and providing services
appropriate to meet those needs, including followup
assessments and long-term services;
``(10) systems under which family members of offenders are
involved in facilitating the successful reentry of those
offenders into the community, including removing obstacles to
the maintenance of family relationships while the offender is
in custody, strengthening the family's capacity to function
as a stable living situation during reentry where appropriate
to the safety and well-being of any children involved, and
involving family members in the planning and implementation
of the reentry process;
``(11) programs under which victims are included, on a
voluntary basis, in the reentry process;
``(12) programs that facilitate visitation and maintenance
of family relationships with respect to offenders in custody
by addressing obstacles such as travel, telephone costs, mail
restrictions, and restrictive visitation policies;
``(13) identifying and addressing barriers to collaborating
with child welfare agencies in the provision of services
jointly to offenders in custody and to the children of such
offenders;
``(14) implementing programs in correctional agencies to
include the collection of information regarding any dependent
children of an incarcerated person as part of intake
procedures, including the number of children, age, and
location or jurisdiction, and connect identified children
with appropriate services;
``(15) addressing barriers to the visitation of children
with an incarcerated parent, and maintenance of the parent-
child relationship, such as the location of facilities in
remote areas, telephone costs, mail restrictions, and
visitation policies;
``(16) creating, developing, or enhancing prisoner and
family assessments curricula, policies, procedures, or
programs (including mentoring programs) to help prisoners
with a history or identified risk of domestic violence,
dating violence, sexual assault, or stalking reconnect with
their families and communities, as appropriate (or when it is
safe to do so), and become mutually respectful, nonabusive
parents or partners, under which particular attention is paid
to the safety of children affected and the confidentiality
concerns of victims, and efforts are coordinated with
existing victim service providers;
``(17) developing programs and activities that support
parent-child relationships, as appropriate to the health and
well-being of the child, such as--
``(A) using telephone conferencing to permit incarcerated
parents to participate in parent-teacher conferences;
``(B) using videoconferencing to allow virtual visitation
when incarcerated persons are more than 100 miles from their
families;
``(C) the development of books on tape programs, through
which incarcerated parents read a book into a tape to be sent
to their children;
``(D) the establishment of family days, which provide for
longer visitation hours or family activities; or
``(E) the creation of children's areas in visitation rooms
with parent-child activities;
``(18) expanding family based treatment centers that offer
family based comprehensive treatment services for parents and
their children as a complete family unit;
``(19) conducting studies to determining who is returning
to prison or jail and which of those returning prisoners
represent the greatest risk to community safety;
[[Page S10720]]
``(20) developing or adopting procedures to ensure that
dangerous felons are not released from prison prematurely;
``(21) developing and implementing procedures to assist
relevant authorities in determining when release is
appropriate and in the use of data to inform the release
decision;
``(22) developing and implementing procedures to identify
efficiently and effectively those violators of probation or
parole who should be returned to prison;
``(23) utilizing validated assessment tools to assess the
risk factors of returning inmates and prioritizing services
based on risk;
``(24) conducting studies to determine who is returning to
prison or jail and which of those returning prisoners
represent the greatest risk to community safety;
``(25) facilitating and encouraging timely and complete
payment of restitution and fines by ex-offenders to victims
and the community;
``(26) establishing or expanding the use of reentry courts
to--
``(A) monitor offenders returning to the community;
``(B) provide returning offenders with--
``(i) drug and alcohol testing and treatment; and
``(ii) mental and medical health assessment and services;
``(C) facilitate restorative justice practices and convene
family or community impact panels, family impact educational
classes, victim impact panels, or victim impact educational
classes;
``(D) provide and coordinate the delivery of other
community services to offenders, including--
``(i) housing assistance;
``(ii) education;
``(iii) employment training;
``(iv) children and family support;
``(v) conflict resolution skills training;
``(vi) family violence intervention programs; and
``(vii) other appropriate social services; and
``(E) establish and implement graduated sanctions and
incentives; and
``(27) providing technology and other tools necessary to
advance post release supervision.''.
(b) Juvenile Offender Demonstration Projects Authorized.--
Section 2976(c) of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3797w(c)) is amended by striking ``may
be expended for'' and all that follows through the period at
the end and inserting ``may be expended for any activity
referred to in subsection (b).''.
(c) Applications; Priorities; Performance Measurements.--
Section 2976 of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3797w) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (h) as subsection (o); and
(2) by striking subsections (d) through (g) and inserting
the following:
``(d) Applications.--A State, unit of local government,
territory, or Indian tribe desiring a grant under this
section shall submit an application to the Attorney General
that--
``(1) contains a reentry strategic plan, which describes
the long-term strategy, and a detailed implementation
schedule, including the jurisdiction's plans to pay for the
program after the Federal funding is discontinued;
``(2) identifies the governmental agencies and community
and faith-based organizations that will be coordinated by,
and collaborate on, the applicant's prisoner reentry strategy
and certifies their involvement; and
``(3) describes the methodology and outcome measures that
will be used in evaluating the program.
``(e) Priority Consideration.--The Attorney General shall
give priority to grant applications that best--
``(1) focus initiatives on geographic areas with a
substantiated high population of ex-offenders;
``(2) include partnerships with community-based
organizations, including faith-based organizations;
``(3) provide consultations with crime victims and former
incarcerated prisoners and their families;
``(4) review the process by which the State adjudicates
violations of parole or supervised release and consider
reforms to maximize the use of graduated, community-based
sanctions for minor and technical violations of parole or
supervised release;
``(5) establish prerelease planning procedures for
prisoners to ensure that a prisoner's eligibility for Federal
or State benefits (including Medicaid, Medicare, Social
Security, and Veterans benefits) upon release is established
prior to release, subject to any limitations in law, and to
ensure that prisoners are provided with referrals to
appropriate social and health services or are linked to
appropriate community-based organizations;
``(6) target high-risk offenders for reentry programs
through validated assessment tools; and
``(7) provide returning offenders with information on how
they can restore their voting rights, and any other civil or
civic rights denied to them due to their offender status,
under the laws of the State where they are released.
``(f) Requirements.--The Attorney General may make a grant
to an applicant only if the application--
``(1) reflects explicit support of the chief executive
officer of the State or unit of local government, territory,
or Indian tribe applying for a grant under this section;
``(2) provides extensive discussion of the role of State
corrections departments, community corrections agencies,
juvenile justice systems, or local jail systems in ensuring
successful reentry of ex-offenders into their communities;
``(3) provides extensive evidence of collaboration with
State and local government agencies overseeing health,
housing, child welfare, education, and employment services,
and local law enforcement;
``(4) in the case of a State grantee, the State provides a
plan for the analysis of existing State statutory,
regulatory, rules-based, and practice-based hurdles to a
prisoner's reintegration into the community; in case of a
local grantee, the local grantee provides a plan for the
analysis of existing local statutory, regulatory, rules-
based, and practice-based hurdles to a prisoner's
reintegration into the community; and in the case of a
territorial grantee, the territory provides a plan for the
analysis of existing territorial statutory, regulatory,
rules-based, and practice-based hurdles to a prisoner's
reintegration into the community that--
``(A) takes particular note of laws, regulations, rules,
and practices that disqualify former prisoners from obtaining
professional licenses or other requirements for certain types
of employment, and that hinder full civic participation;
``(B) identifies those laws, regulations, rules, or
practices that are not directly connected to the crime
committed and the risk that the ex-offender presents to the
community; and
``(C) affords members of the public an opportunity to
participate in the process described in this subsection; and
``(5) includes the use of a State or local task force to
carry out the activities funded under the grant.
``(g) Uses of Grant Funds.--
``(1) Federal share.--The Federal share of a grant received
under this section may not exceed 75 percent of the project
funded under the grant, unless the Attorney General--
``(A) waives, in whole or in part, the requirement of this
paragraph; and
``(B) publicly delineates the rationale for the waiver.
``(2) Supplement not supplant.--Federal funds received
under this section shall be used to supplement, not supplant,
non-Federal funds that would otherwise be available for the
activities funded under this section.
``(h) Reentry Strategic Plan.--
``(1) In general.--As a condition of receiving financial
assistance under this section, each applicant shall develop a
comprehensive strategic reentry plan that contains measurable
annual and 5- to 10-year performance outcomes. The plan shall
have as a goal to reduce the rate of recidivism of
incarcerated persons served with funds from this section
within the State by 50 percent over a period of 10 years.
``(2) Coordination.--In developing reentry plans under this
subsection, applicants shall coordinate with communities and
stakeholders, including experts in the fields of public
safety, corrections, housing, health, education, employment,
and members of community and faith-based organizations that
provide reentry services.
``(3) Measurements of progress.--Each reentry plan
developed under this subsection shall measure the applicant's
progress toward increasing public safety by reducing rates of
recidivism and enabling released offenders to transition
successfully back into their communities.
``(i) Reentry Task Force.--
``(1) In general.--As a condition of receiving financial
assistance under this section, each State or local government
receiving a grant shall establish or empower a Reentry Task
Force, or other relevant convening authority, to examine ways
to pool existing resources and funding streams to promote
lower recidivism rates for returning prisoners, and to
minimize the harmful effects of incarceration on families and
communities by collecting data and best practices in offender
reentry from demonstration grantees and other agencies and
organizations.
``(2) Membership.--The task force or other authority shall
be comprised of relevant State or local leaders, agencies,
service providers, community-based organizations, and
stakeholders.
``(j) Strategic Performance Outcomes.--
``(1) In general.--Each applicant shall identify specific
performance outcomes related to the long-term goals of
increasing public safety and reducing recidivism.
``(2) Performance outcomes.--The performance outcomes
identified under paragraph (1) shall include, with respect to
offenders released back into the community--
``(A) recommitment rates;
``(B) reduction in crime;
``(C) employment and education;
``(D) violations of conditions of supervised release;
``(E) child support;
``(F) housing;
``(G) drug and alcohol abuse; and
``(H) participation in mental health services.
``(3) Optional measures.--States may also report on other
activities that increase the success rates of offenders who
transition from prison, such as programs that foster
effective risk management and treatment programming, offender
accountability, and community and victim participation.
[[Page S10721]]
``(4) Coordination.--Applicants should coordinate with
communities and stakeholders about the selection of
performance outcomes identified by the applicants and with
the Department of Justice for assistance with data collection
and measurement activities.
``(5) Report.--Each grantee shall submit an annual report
to the Department of Justice that--
``(A) identifies the grantee's progress toward achieving
its strategic performance outcomes; and
``(B) describes other activities conducted by the grantee
to increase the success rates of the reentry population.
``(k) Performance Measurement.--
``(1) In general.--The Department of Justice, in
consultation with the States, shall--
``(A) identify primary and secondary sources of information
to support the measurement of the performance indicators
identified under this section;
``(B) identify sources and methods of data collection in
support of performance measurement required under this
section;
``(C) provide to all grantees technical assistance and
training on performance measures and data collection for
purposes of this section; and
``(D) coordinate with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health
Services Administration on strategic performance outcome
measures and data collection for purposes of this section
relating to substance abuse and mental health.
``(2) Coordination.--The Department of Justice shall
coordinate with other Federal agencies to identify national
sources of information to support State performance
measurement.
``(l) Future Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a
grant under this section for fiscal years after the first
receipt of such a grant, a State shall submit to the Attorney
General such information as is necessary to demonstrate
that--
``(1) the State has adopted a reentry plan that reflects
input from community-based and faith-based organizations;
``(2) the public has been afforded an opportunity to
provide input in the development of the plan;
``(3) the State's reentry plan includes performance
measures to assess the State's progress toward increasing
public safety by reducing by 10 percent over the 2-year
period the rate at which individuals released from prison who
participate in the reentry system supported by Federal funds
are recommitted to prison; and
``(4) the State will coordinate with the Department of
Justice, community-based and faith-based organizations, and
other experts regarding the selection and implementation of
the performance measures described in subsection (k).
``(m) National Adult and Juvenile Offender Reentry Resource
Center.--
``(1) Authority.--The Attorney General may, using amounts
made available to carry out this subsection, make a grant to
an eligible organization to provide for the establishment of
a National Adult and Juvenile Offender Reentry Resource
Center.
``(2) Eligible organization.--An organization eligible for
the grant under paragraph (1) is any national nonprofit
organization approved by the Federal task force established
under the Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004 that represents,
provides technical assistance and training to, and has
special expertise and broad, national-level experience in
offender reentry programs, training, and research.
``(3) Use of funds.--The organization receiving the grant
shall establish a National Adult and Juvenile Offender
Reentry Resource Center to--
``(A) provide education, training, and technical assistance
for States, local governments, territories, Indian tribes,
service providers, faith based organizations, and corrections
institutions;
``(B) collect data and best practices in offender reentry
from demonstration grantees and others agencies and
organizations;
``(C) develop and disseminate evaluation tools, mechanisms,
and measures to better assess and document coalition
performance measures and outcomes;
``(D) disseminate knowledge to States and other relevant
entities about best practices, policy standards, and research
findings;
``(E) develop and implement procedures to assist relevant
authorities in determining when release is appropriate and in
the use of data to inform the release decision;
``(F) develop and implement procedures to identify
efficiently and effectively those violators of probation or
parole who should be returned to prison and those who should
receive other penalties based on defined, graduated
sanctions;
``(G) collaborate with the Federal task force established
under the Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004 and the Federal
Resource Center for Children of Prisoners;
``(H) develop a national research agenda; and
``(I) bridge the gap between research and practice by
translating knowledge from research into practical
information.
``(4) Of amounts made available to carry out this section,
not more than 4 percent shall be available to carry out this
subsection.
``(n) Administration.--Of amounts made available to carry
out this section, not more than 2 percent shall be available
for administrative expenses in carrying out this section.''.
(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 2976 of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
3797w) is amended in subsection (o)(1), as redesignated by
subsection (c), by striking ``and $16,000,000 for fiscal year
2005'' and inserting ``$130,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, and
$130,000,000 for fiscal year 2006''.
SEC. 4. TASK FORCE ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES
RELATING TO REENTRY OF OFFENDERS.
(a) Task Force Required.--The Attorney General, in
consultation with the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of
Education, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the
Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs,
and the heads of such other elements of the Federal
Government as the Attorney General considers appropriate, and
in collaboration with stakeholders, service providers,
community-based organizations, States, territories, Indian
tribes, and local governments, shall establish an interagency
task force on programs and activities relating to the reentry
of offenders into the community.
(b) Duties.--The task force established under subsection
(a) shall--
(1) identify such programs and activities that may be
resulting in overlapping or duplication of services, the
scope of such overlapping or duplication, and the
relationship of such overlapping and duplication to public
safety, public health, and effectiveness and efficiency;
(2) identify methods to improve collaboration and
coordination of such programs and activities;
(3) identify areas of responsibility in which improved
collaboration and coordination of such programs and
activities would result in increased effectiveness or
efficiency;
(4) develop innovative interagency or intergovernmental
programs, activities, or procedures that would improve
outcomes of reentering offenders and children of offenders;
(5) develop methods for increasing regular communication
that would increase interagency program effectiveness;
(6) identify areas of research that can be coordinated
across agencies with an emphasis on applying science-based
practices to support treatment and intervention programs for
reentering offenders;
(7) identify funding areas that should be coordinated
across agencies and any gaps in funding; and
(8) in conjunction with the National Adult and Juvenile
Offender Reentry Resource Center, identify successful
programs currently operating and collect best practices in
offender reentry from demonstration grantees and other
agencies and organizations, determine the extent to which
such programs and practices can be replicated, and make
information on such programs and practices available to
States, localities, community-based organizations, and
others.
(c) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the task force established under
subsection (a) shall submit a report, including
recommendations, to Congress on barriers to reentry. The task
force shall provide for public input in preparing the report.
The report shall identify Federal and other barriers to
successful reentry of offenders into the community and
analyze the effects of such barriers on offenders and on
children and other family members of offenders, including
barriers to--
(1) parental incarceration as a consideration for purposes
of family reunification under the Adoption and Safe Families
Act of 1997;
(2) admissions in and evictions from Federal housing
programs;
(3) child support obligations and procedures;
(4) Social Security benefits, veterans benefits, food
stamps, and other forms of Federal public assistance;
(5) Medicaid and Medicare procedures, requirements,
regulations, and guidelines;
(6) education programs, financial assistance, and full
civic participation;
(7) TANF program funding criteria and other welfare
benefits;
(8) employment;
(9) laws, regulations, rules, and practices that restrict
Federal employment licensure and participation in Federal
contracting programs;
(10) reentry procedures, case planning, and the transition
of persons from the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons
to a Federal parole or probation program or community
corrections;
(11) laws, regulations, rules, and practices that may
require a parolee to return to the same county that the
parolee was living in prior to his or her arrest, and the
potential for changing such laws, regulations, rules, and
practices so that a parolee may change his or her setting
upon release, and not settle in the same location with
persons who may be a negative influence; and
(12) pre-release planning procedures for prisoners to
ensure that a prisoner's eligibility for Federal or State
benefits (including Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, and
veteran's benefits) upon release is established prior to
release, subject to any limitations under the law, and the
provision of referrals to appropriate social and health
services or are linked to appropriate community-based
organizations.
(d) Annual Reports.--On an annual basis, the task force
required by subsection (a) shall submit to Congress a report
on the activities of the task force, including specific
[[Page S10722]]
recommendations of the task force on matters referred to in
subsection (b).
SEC. 5. OFFENDER REENTRY RESEARCH.
(a) National Institute of Justice.--From amounts made
available to carry out this Act, the National Institute of
Justice may conduct research on offender reentry, including--
(1) a study identifying the number and characteristics of
children who have had a parent incarcerated and the
likelihood of these minors becoming involved in the criminal
justice system some time in their lifetime;
(2) a study identifying a mechanism to compare rates of
recidivism (including re-arrest, violations of parole and
probation, and re-incarceration) among States; and
(3) a study on the population of individuals released from
custody who do not engage in recidivism and the
characteristics (housing, employment, treatment, family
connection) of that population.
(b) Bureau of Justice Statistics.--From amounts made
available to carry out this Act, the Bureau of Justice
Statistics may conduct research on offender reentry,
including--
(1) an analysis of special populations, including prisoners
with mental illness or substance abuse disorders, female
offenders, juvenile offenders, and the elderly, that present
unique reentry challenges;
(2) studies to determine who is returning to prison or jail
and which of those returning prisoners represent the greatest
risk to community safety;
(3) annual reports on the profile of the population coming
out of prisons, jails, and juvenile justice facilities;
(4) a national recidivism study every 3 years; and
(5) a study of parole violations and revocations.
SEC. 6. CHILDREN OF INCARCERATED PARENTS AND FAMILIES.
(a) Intake Procedures and Education Programs.--
(1) Pilot program.--The Federal Bureau of Prisons shall,
using amounts made available to carry out this subsection,
carry out a pilot program to--
(A) collect information regarding the dependent children of
an incarcerated person as part of standard intake procedures,
including the number, age, and residence of such children;
(B) review all policies, practices, and facilities to
ensure that, as appropriate to the health and well-being of
the child, they support the relationship between family and
child;
(C) identify the training needs of staff with respect to
the impact of incarceration on children, families, and
communities, age-appropriate interactions, and community
resources for the families of incarcerated persons; and
(D) take such steps as are necessary to encourage State
correctional agencies to implement the requirements of
subparagraphs (A) through (C).
(2) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $1,500,000
for each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
(b) Duties of Secretary.--The Secretary of Health and Human
Services shall--
(1) review, and make available to States a report on any
recommendations regarding, the role of State child protective
services at the time of the arrest of a person; and
(2) by regulation, establish such services as the Secretary
determines necessary, as appropriate to the health and well-
being of any child involved, for the preservation of families
that have been impacted by the incarceration of a family
member.
SEC. 7. ENCOURAGEMENT OF EMPLOYMENT OF FORMER PRISONERS.
The Secretary of Labor shall take such steps as are
necessary to implement a program, including but not limited
to the Employment and Training Administration, to educate
employers about existing incentives, including bonding, to
the hiring of former Federal, State, or county prisoners.
SEC. 8. FEDERAL RESOURCE CENTER FOR CHILDREN OF PRISONERS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of
Health and Human Services for each of fiscal years 2005 and
2006, such sums as may be necessary for the continuing
activities of the Federal Resource Center for Children of
Prisoners, including conducting a review of the policies and
practices of State and Federal corrections agencies to
support parent-child relationships, as appropriate for the
health and well-being of the child.
SEC. 9. ELIMINATION OF AGE REQUIREMENT FOR RELATIVE CAREGIVER
UNDER NATIONAL FAMILY CAREGIVER SUPPORT
PROGRAM.
Section 372 of the National Family Caregiver Support Act
(part E of title III of the Older Americans Act of 1965; 42
U.S.C. 3030s) is amended in paragraph (3) by striking ``who
is 60 years of age or older and--'' and inserting ``who--''.
SEC. 10. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY TO PLACE PRISONER IN
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS.
Section 3624(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows:
``(c) Pre-Release Custody.--
``(1) In general.--The Bureau of Prisons shall, to the
extent practicable, assure that a prisoner serving a term of
imprisonment spends a reasonable part of the final portion of
the term to be served, not to exceed 1 year, under conditions
that will afford the prisoner a reasonable opportunity to
adjust to and prepare for the prisoner's reentry into the
community. Such conditions may include a community
correctional facility.
``(2) Authority.--This subsection authorizes the Bureau of
Prisons to place a prisoner in home confinement for the last
10 per centum of the term to be served, not to exceed 6
months.
``(3) Assistance.--The United States Probation System
shall, to the extent practicable, offer assistance to a
prisoner during such pre-release custody.
``(4) No limitations.--Nothing in this subsection shall be
construed to limit or restrict the authority of the Bureau of
Prisons granted under section 3621 of this title.''.
SEC. 11. USE OF VIOLENT OFFENDER TRUTH-IN-SENTENCING GRANT
FUNDING FOR DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ACTIVITIES.
Section 20102(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law
Enforcement Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 13702(a)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) to carry out any activity referred to in subsections
(b) and (c) of section 2976 of the Omnibus Crime Control and
Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3797w(b)-(c)).''.
SEC. 12. GRANTS TO STUDY PAROLE OR POST INCARCERATION
SUPERVISION VIOLATIONS AND REVOCATIONS.
(a) Grants Authorized.--From amounts made available to
carry out this section, the Attorney General may award grants
to States to study, and to improve the collection of data
with respect to, individuals whose parole or post
incarceration supervision is revoked and which such
individuals represent the greatest risk to community safety.
(b) Application.--As a condition of receiving a grant under
this section, a State shall--
(1) certify that the State has, or intends to establish, a
program that collects comprehensive and reliable data with
respect to individuals described in subsection (a), including
data on--
(A) the number and type of parole or post incarceration
supervision violations that occur within the State;
(B) the reasons for parole or post incarceration
supervision revocation;
(C) the underlying behavior that led to the revocation; and
(D) the term of imprisonment or other penalty that is
imposed for the violation; and
(2) provide the data described in paragraph (1) to the
Bureau of Justice Statistics, in a form prescribed by the
Bureau.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $1,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
SEC. 13. REAUTHORIZATION OF RESIDENTIAL SUBSTANCE ABUSE
TREATMENT FOR STATE PRISONERS PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3701 et seq.) is amended by inserting
after section 1905 the following:
``SEC. 1906. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are
necessary to carry out the purposes of this part for each of
fiscal years 2005 through 2010.''.
(b) Improvements to Program.--Section 1902 of the Omnibus
Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796ff-
1) is amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) in the subsection heading, by striking ``Eligibility
for Preference With'' and inserting ``Requirement for'';
(B) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following:
``(1) To be eligible for funding under this part, a State
shall ensure that individuals who participate in the
evidence-based substance abuse treatment program established
or implemented with assistance provided under this part will
be provided with aftercare services.''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Aftercare services required under paragraph (1) shall
be funded by amounts made available under this part.'';
(2) by redesignating subsections (c) through (f) as (d)
through (g), respectively; and
(3) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Definition of Residential Substance Abuse
Treatment.--The term `residential substance abuse treatment'
means a course of evidence-based individual and group
activities and treatment, lasting not less than 6 months, in
residential treatment facilities set apart from the general
prison population. Such treatment can include the use of
pharmacotherapies, where appropriate, that may be
administered for more than 6 months.''.
SEC. 14. REAUTHORIZATION OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE TREATMENT PROGRAM
UNDER TITLE 18.
Section 3621(e) of title 18, United States Code, is
amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to
carry out this subsection for each of fiscal years 2005
through 2010.''; and
(2) in paragraph (5), by striking subparagraph (A) and
inserting the following:
[[Page S10723]]
``(A) the term `residential substance abuse treatment'
means a course of evidence-based individual and group
activities and treatment, lasting not less than 6 months, in
residential treatment facilities set apart from the general
prison population, and such treatment can include the use of
pharmacotherapies, where appropriate, that may be
administered for more than 6 months;''.
SEC. 15. REMOVAL OF LIMITATION ON AMOUNT OF FUNDS AVAILABLE
FOR CORRECTIONS EDUCATION PROGRAMS UNDER THE
ADULT EDUCATION AND FAMILY LITERACY ACT.
(a) In General.--Section 222(a)(1) of the Adult Education
and Family Literacy Act (20 U.S.C. 9222(a)(1)) is amended by
striking ``, of which not more than 10 percent'' and
inserting ``of which not less than 10 percent''.
(b) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Education shall
submit to Congress a report on the use of literacy funds to
correctional intuitions, as defined in section 225(d)(2) of
the Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (20 U.S.C.
9224(d)(2)). The report shall specify the amount of
literacy funds that are provided to each category of
correctional institution in each State, and identify whether
funds are being sufficiently allocated among the various
types of institutions.
SEC. 16. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT TO DRUG-FREE STUDENT LOANS
PROVISION TO ENSURE THAT IT APPLIES ONLY TO
OFFENSES COMMITTED WHILE RECEIVING FEDERAL AID.
Section 4840(r)(1) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20
U.S.C. 1091(r)(1)) is amended by striking ``A student'' and
all that follows through ``table:'' and inserting the
following: ``A student who is convicted of any offense under
any Federal or State law involving the possession or sale of
a controlled substance for conduct that occurred during a
period of enrollment for which the student was receiving any
grant, loan, or work assistance under this title shall not be
eligible to receive any grant, loan, or work assistance under
this title from the date of that conviction for the period of
time specified in the following table:''.
SEC. 17. MENTORING GRANTS TO COMMUNITY-BASED ORGANIZATIONS.
(a) Authority To Make Grants.--From amounts made available
under this section, the Secretary of Labor shall make grants
to community-based organizations for the purpose of providing
mentoring and other transitional services essential to
reintegrating ex-offenders and incarcerated persons into
society.
(b) Use of Funds.--Grant funds awarded under subsection (a)
may be used for--
(1) mentoring adult and juvenile offenders; and
(2) transitional services to assist in the re-integration
of ex-offenders into the community.
(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
this section, a community-based organization shall submit an
application to the Secretary of Labor, based upon criteria
developed by the Secretary of Labor in consultation with the
Attorney General and the Secretary of Housing and Urban
Development.
(d) Strategic Performance Outcomes.--The Secretary of Labor
may require each applicant to identify specific performance
outcomes related to the long-term goal of stabilizing
communities by reducing recidivism and re-integrating ex-
offenders and incarcerated persons into society.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $15,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
SEC. 18. GROUP HOMES FOR RECOVERING SUBSTANCE ABUSERS.
Section 1925 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
300x-25) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(4), by striking ``$4,000'' and
inserting ``$6,000''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Recovery Home Outreach Workers.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall award a grant to an
eligible entity to enable such entity to establish group
homes for recovering substance abusers in accordance with
this section.
``(2) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
paragraph (1), an entity shall--
``(A) be a national nonprofit organization that has
established at least 500 self-administered, self-supported
substance abuse recovery homes; and
``(B) prepare and submit to the Secretary an application at
such time, in such manner, and containing such information as
the Secretary may require.
``(3) Use of funds.--An entity shall use amounts received
under the grant under paragraph (1) to--
``(A) establish group homes for recovering substance
abusers that conform to the requirements of subparagraphs (A)
through (D) of subsection (a)(6), through activities
including--
``(i) locating a suitable facility to use as the group
home;
``(ii) the execution of a lease for the use of such home;
and
``(iii) obtaining a charter for the operation of such home
from a national non-profit organization;
``(B) recruit recovering substance abusers to reside in the
group home by working with criminal justice officials and
substance abuse treatment providers, including through
activities targeting individuals being released from
incarceration; and
``(C) carry out other activities related to establishing a
group home for recovering substance abusers.
``(4) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection,
$1,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
Amounts appropriated under this paragraph shall be in
addition to amounts otherwise appropriated to carry out this
subpart.''.
SEC. 19. IMPROVED REENTRY PROCEDURES FOR FEDERAL PRISONERS.
(a) General Reentry Procedures.--The Department of Justice
shall take such steps as are necessary to modify existing
procedures and policies to enhance case planning and to
improve the transition of persons from the custody of the
Bureau of Prisons to the community, including placement of
such individuals in community corrections facilities.
(b) Procedures Regarding Benefits.--The Bureau of Prisons
shall establish pre-release planning procedures for Federal
prisoners to ensure that a prisoner's eligibility for Federal
or State benefits (including Medicaid, Medicare, Social
Security and veterans benefits) upon release is established
prior to release, subject to any limitations in law. The
Bureau shall also coordinate with inmates to ensure that
inmates have medical appointments scheduled and have plans to
secure needed and sufficient medications, particularly with
regard to the treatment of mental illness. The Bureau shall
provide each ex-offender released from Federal prisons
information on how the reentering offender can restore voting
rights, and other civil or civic rights, denied to the
reentering offender based upon their offender status in the
State to which that reentering offender shall be returning.
This information shall be provided to each reentering
offender in writing, and in a language that the reentering
offender can understand.
SEC. 20. FAMILY UNIFICATION IN PUBLIC HOUSING.
Section 576 of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility
Act of 1988 (Public Law 105-276; 42 U.S.C. 13661) is
amended--
(1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:
``(c) Authority To Deny Admission to Criminal Offenders.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in subsections (a)
and (b) of this section and in addition to any other
authority to screen applicants, in selecting among applicants
for admission to the program or to federally assisted
housing, if the public housing agency or owner of such
housing, as applicable, determines that an applicant or any
member of the applicant's household is engaged in or was
convicted of, during a reasonable time preceding the date
when the applicant household would otherwise be selected for
admission, any drug-related or violent criminal activity or
other criminal activity which would adversely affect the
health, safety, or right to peaceful enjoyment of the
premises by other residents, the owner, or public housing
agency employees, the public housing agency or owner may--
``(A) deny such applicant admission to the program or to
federally assisted housing; and
``(B) after the expiration of the reasonable period
beginning upon such activity, require the applicant, as a
condition of admission to the program or to federally
assisted housing, to submit to the public housing agency or
owner evidence sufficient (as the Secretary shall by
regulation provide) to ensure that the individual or
individuals in the applicant's household who engaged in
criminal activity for which denial was made under paragraph
(1) have not engaged in any criminal activity during such
reasonable period.
``(2) Consideration of rehabilitation.--In determining
whether, pursuant to paragraph (1), to deny admission to the
program or federally assisted housing to any household, a
public housing agency or an owner shall, prior to an initial
denial of eligibility, consider the following factors:
``(A) The effect of denial on the applicant's family,
particularly minor children.
``(B) Whether such household member has successfully
completed a supervised drug or alcohol rehabilitation program
(as applicable) and is no longer engaging in the illegal use
of a controlled substance or abuse of alcohol (as applicable)
to the extent that such use would constitute a threat to the
health, safety, or well-being of other residents.
``(C) Whether such household member has otherwise been
rehabilitated successfully and is no longer engaging in the
illegal use of a controlled substance or abuse of alcohol (as
applicable) to the extent that such use would constitute a
threat to the health, safety, or well-being of other
residents.
``(D) Whether such household member is participating in a
supervised drug or alcohol rehabilitation program (as
applicable) and is no longer engaging in the illegal use of a
controlled substance or abuse of alcohol (as applicable) to
the extent that such use would constitute a threat to the
health, safety, or well-being of other residents.
``(E) Other mitigating circumstances such as--
``(i) the applicant's involvement in the community;
``(ii) the applicant's enrollment in or completion of a job
training program;
``(iii) the employment status of the applicant;
``(iv) any other circumstances which reflect the efforts
the applicant has made toward rehabilitation; and
[[Page S10724]]
``(v) the availability of other housing options.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(d) Conditional Eligibility.--A public housing agency or
owner of such housing may condition an applicant's or a
household's eligibility for federally assisted housing on the
participation of the applicant, or a member of the
applicant's household, in a supervised rehabilitation
program, or other appropriate social services.''.
Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to speak in
support of legislation which I am sponsoring with the Senator from
Delaware, Mr. Biden--the Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004. This year,
more than 650,000 inmates will be released from the United States'
prisons. Nearly two-thirds of released prisoners are re-arrested for
either a felony or a serious misdemeanor within 3 years of release.
This ``revolving door'' of criminals endangers our communities. Yet, it
should really come as no surprise that an individual who is released
and who is illiterate or lacks the necessary skills to get a job
returns to a life of crime. The need to address the issue of recidivism
to protect the public is apparent and the Enhanced Second Chance Act is
designed to address that need and stop the ``revolving door'' at our
Nation's correctional facilities. This bill gives criminal offenders a
second chance at rehabilitation and gainful employment by creating
successful reentry programs focused on education and job training.
There are two categories of individuals that we must focus our
concern on in our fight to reduce recidivism--the career criminal and
the person who will one day return back to his or her community. As for
the career criminal, I wrote the Armed Career Criminal Bill that was
adopted in 1984, which provides for life sentences for career
criminals. These individuals, who have committed three or more major
offenses and caught in possession of a firearm, receive mandatory
sentences up to life.
The second category of individuals--individuals who will one day be
released--are a special circumstance because this is not about locking
them up forever but about making sure they have an opportunity to turn
their life around. It is about focusing on literacy and job training in
order to reduce recidivism and prevent those individuals from becoming
career criminals.
The Enhanced Second Chance Act is aimed at better equipping the
community, increasing public safety, and helping States and communities
address the growing population of ex-offenders returning to
communities. The act authorizes a $130 million a year grant program for
State and local governments aimed at creating programs to help reduce
recidivism rates and to create procedures to ensure that dangerous
felons are not released from prison prematurely. It also calls for
either establishing or expanding the use of State reentry courts to
monitor ex-offenders returning to the community and to provide them
with drug and alcohol treatment as well as necessary mental and medical
services.
One of the most significant concerns that our communities face with
regards to prisoners is the impact on their children and communities.
Between 1991 and 1999, the number of children with a parent in a
Federal or State correction facility increased by more than 100 percent
from approximately 900,000 to approximately 2 million. This legislation
deals with the issues and obstacles that these children face. The
Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004 creates a new program designed to
support the relationship between parent and child while the parent is
incarcerated and to help with family unification when the parent is
released. It also instructs the Secretary of Health and Human Services
to re-examine the current programs that are in place to help support
the parent-child relationship while the parent is incarcerated and to
establish the necessary services to help preserve the family
relationship.
Another major concern is incarcerated juveniles. Juveniles have a
recidivism rate ranging from 55 to 75 percent. These figures are
staggering and that is why I have pushed for so many years for
legislation aimed at educating these young offenders prior to their
release. I have consistently sponsored legislation that would provide
for workplace and community transition training for incarcerated youth
offenders while in prison and would provide employment counseling and
other services that would continue while the individual was on parole.
The Enhanced Second Chance Act of 2004 builds upon my earlier efforts
and provides effective reentry and aftercare programs so that these
young individuals will have a chance at a successful transition back
into the community. This bill encourages State and local governments to
assess the literacy and educational needs of incarcerated individuals
and to identify appropriate services to meet those needs while they are
incarcerated. Moreover, this bill provides for collaboration with
community colleges and employment services to connect inmates with
employment opportunities before they are released back into the
community.
The New York Times recently reported that 5 million people, or
roughly 2.3 percent of the electorate, will be barred from voting in
November by State laws that strip felons of voting rights. However many
ex-felons are in fact eligible to vote but do not do so simply because
they are not aware that they have this right. The Enhanced Second
Chance Act helps remove the confusion and mandates that prison
officials provide each ex-offender released from Federal prison
information on how the reentering offender can restore his or her
voting rights. Information must be provided to each ex-offender in
writing and in a language that he or she can understand. This will
allow ex-offenders to feel more connected to their communities and is
another important tool in the fight to reduce recidivism.
I am pleased to join the distinguished Senator from Delaware in
introducing this important and much-needed legislation. The Enhanced
Second Chance Act of 2004 is a very positive step forward in providing
realistic rehabilitation to individuals needing a second chance. I
wholeheartedly agree with President Bush's statement that ``America is
the land of second chance, and when the gates of the prison open, the
path ahead should lead to a better life.'' The President urged us to
work in a bipartisan fashion and I believe that this bill is the first
step in the right direction.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today, along with Senators Biden,
Specter, and Landrieu, to introduce the Enhanced Second Chance Act of
2004.
I believe this is an important bill that will significantly improve
public safety by providing $130 million a year for a competitive grant
program to State, local, and tribal governments to reduce recidivism
rates and improve the transition of offenders back into society. In
addition to the adult and juvenile demonstration projects, the bill
would create a Federal reentry task force, reauthorize funding for drug
treatment programs in State and Federal correctional facilities,
establish a program within the Bureau of Prisons to promote family
reunification, bring additional literacy funds to correctional
institutions, and establish a mentoring grant program for community-
based organizations to assist inmates with their reentry back into the
community.
We as a society have an interest in ensuring that when prisoners are
released that they be reintegrated back into the community in a manner
that reduces the likelihood of them committing additional crimes.
Providing assistance to these individuals is not a charity, it is a
matter of good public policy. Without employment, without housing,
without basic life skills, without help in treating drug addiction or
mental illness, offenders are likely to relapse into criminal behavior.
It is insufficient to just punish offenders; we also need to look for
ways that we can rehabilitate offenders and create an environment that
fosters their ability to make a positive contribution to society.
There are programs in State and Federal detention facilities that are
beginning to address some of these issues, but frankly, I believe we
need to be doing more--especially with regard to jails across the
country. By neglecting to focus on inmates in local jails we are also
losing out on targeting the largest population of offenders that is
returning to the community--it is estimated that jails return 10 to 20
times the number of people into the community as do Federal and State
prisons,
[[Page S10725]]
approximately 10 million releases a year. I am very pleased that my
suggestions regarding recognizing the role of local jails in the
reentry process were incorporated into this bill.
I also believe we need to pay more attention to the issue of
illiteracy among inmates. According to the National Institute of
Literacy, 70 percent of all prisoners function at the two lowest
literacy levels. Considering that studies have consistently
demonstrated that correctional educational programs reduce recidivism
rates by up to 30 percent, I strongly believe this is an area which
deserves attention, and I am happy that this bill will bring additional
resources for literacy programs.
If we are going to reduce the recidivism rate, we can't overlook the
importance of getting these offenders the tools necessary to succeed in
the community without recourse to crime. With over 2 million people
incarcerated in the United States, if punishment is all we do, without
any effort to rehabilitate and reintegrate offenders into the
community, society will bear a heavy burden. Over 650,000 offenders are
released from State and Federal facilities each year, in addition to
100,000 juveniles and the numerous individuals coming in and out of
local jails that I previously mentioned. It makes sense to do all we
can to ensure that these people are rehabilitated and have the skills
necessary to successfully change course.
In recent years, many States and localities have begun to improve
ways to transition offenders back into communities, and I believe that
this bill provides the resources necessary to continue this effort.
______
By Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself and Mr. Coleman):
S. 2926. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow
taxpayers a credit against income tax for expenditures to remediate
contaminated sites; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. VOINOVICH. Mr. President, revitalizing our urban areas has been
an issue I have been passionate about for many years. As former Mayor
of Cleveland, I experienced firsthand the difficulties that cities face
in redeveloping these sites for reuse.
The legislation I am introducing today with Senator Coleman, the
Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2004, will provide incentives to
clean up abandoned industrial sites--or brownfields--across the country
and put them back into productive use and preserve our green spaces. I
am pleased to be working on this important legislation with my
colleague from Ohio, Congressman Mike Turner.
I have been working on brownfields issues at the national level since
I became Governor of Ohio in 1990 and through my involvement with the
National Governors' Association and the Republican Governors'
Association. For almost 15 years, I have worked closely with
congressional leaders to develop legislation that would encourage
cleanup and redevelopment of these sites nationwide.
In 2001, I was closely involved in the Senate Environment and Public
Works Committee's work on the Brownfields Revitalization and
Environmental Restoration Act which, in part, provided grants to local
governments to remediate and redevelop brownfields sites. Grants such
as these are important because they provide incentives to clean up
existing sites, which will provide better protection for the health and
safety of our citizens and the environment. I believe the tax
incentives in the bill I'm introducing today will work hand in hand
with the grants that are already authorized to encourage private
remediation and redevelopment efforts.
To enhance and encourage cleanup efforts, my State of Ohio has
implemented a private sector-based program to clean up brownfields
sites. When I was Governor, Ohio EPA, Republicans and Democrats in the
Ohio General Assembly and I worked hard to implement a program that we
believe works for Ohio. Our program is already successful in improving
Ohio's environment and economy. In fact, 141 sites have been cleaned up
under Ohio's voluntary cleanup program in 8 years. And many more
cleanups are underway.
The legislation I am introducing today will build upon the success of
State programs such as Ohio's by providing even more incentives to
clean up brownfield sites in order to provide better protection for the
health and safety of our citizens and the environment.
This legislation will provide additional tools to recycle our urban
wastelands, prevent urban sprawl and preserve our farmland and
greenspaces. We will be able to clean up industrial eyesores in our
cities and make them more desirable places to live. Because they are
putting abandoned sites back into productive use, they are a key
element to providing economic rebirth to many urban areas, and good-
paying jobs to local residents.
This bill makes sense for our environment and it makes sense for our
economy. It is supported by the mayors of Ohio's major cities, the U.S.
Conference of Mayors, the International Council of Shopping Centers,
Empower America, American Council of Engineering Companies, and the
National Association of Home Builders.
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. 2926
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 ``Brownfields Revitalization
Act of 2004''.
SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR EXPENDITURES TO REMEDIATE CONTAMINATED
SITES.
(a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
business related credits) is amended by adding at the end the
following new section:
``SEC. 45G. ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION CREDIT.
``(a) In General.--For purposes of section 38, the
environmental remediation credit determined under this
section is 50 percent of the qualified remediation
expenditures paid or incurred by the taxpayer during the
taxable year with respect to a qualified contaminated site
located in an eligible area.
``(b) Qualified Remediation Expenditures.--For purposes of
this section, the term `qualified remediation expenditures'
means expenditures, whether or not chargeable to capital
account, in connection with--
``(1) the abatement or control of any hazardous substance
(as defined in section 198(d)), petroleum, or any petroleum
by-product at the qualified contaminated site in accordance
with an approved remediation and redevelopment plan,
``(2) the complete demolition of any structure on such site
if any portion of such structure is demolished in connection
with such abatement or control,
``(3) the removal and disposal of property in connection
with the activities described in paragraphs (1) and (2), and
``(4) the reconstruction of utilities in connection with
such activities.
For purposes of this section, the term `approved remediation
and redevelopment plan' means any plan for such abatement,
control, and redevelopment of a qualified contaminated site
which is approved by the State development agency for the
State in which the qualified contaminated site is located.
``(c) Credit May Not Exceed Allocation.--
``(1) In general.--The environmental remediation credit
determined under this section with respect to any qualified
contaminated site shall not exceed the credit amount
allocated under this section by the State development agency
to the taxpayer for the remediation and redevelopment plan
submitted by the taxpayer with respect to such site.
``(2) Time for making allocation.--An allocation shall be
taken into account under paragraph (1) for any taxable year
only if made before the close of the calendar year in which
such taxable year begins.
``(3) Manner of allocation.--
``(A) Allocation must be pursuant to plan.--No amount may
be allocated under this subsection to any qualified
contaminated site unless such amount is allocated pursuant to
a qualified allocation plan of the State development agency
of the State in which such site is located.
``(B) Qualified allocation plan.--For purposes of this
paragraph, the term `qualified allocation plan' means any
plan--
``(i) which sets forth selection criteria to be used to
determine priorities of the State development agency in
allocating credit amounts under this section, and
``(ii) which gives preference in allocating credit amounts
under this section to qualified contaminated sites based on--
``(I) the extent of poverty,
``(II) whether the site is located in an enterprise zone or
renewal community,
``(III) whether the site is located in the central business
district of the local jurisdiction,
``(IV) the extent of the required environmental
remediation,
``(V) the extent of the commercial, industrial, or
residential redevelopment of the
[[Page S10726]]
site in addition to environmental remediation,
``(VI) the extent of the financial commitment to such
redevelopment, and
``(VII) the amount of new employment expected to result
from such redevelopment.
``(4) States may impose other conditions.--Nothing in this
section shall be construed to prevent any State from
requiring assurances, including bonding, that any project for
which a credit amount is allocated under this section will be
properly completed or that the financial commitments of the
taxpayer are actually carried out.
``(d) State Environmental Remediation Credit Ceiling.--
``(1) In general.--The State environmental remediation
credit ceiling applicable to any State for any calendar year
shall be an amount equal to the sum of--
``(A) the unused State environmental remediation credit
ceiling (if any) of such State for the preceding calendar
year,
``(B) such State's share of the national environmental
remediation credit limitation for the calendar year,
``(C) the amount of State environmental remediation credit
ceiling returned in the calendar year, plus
``(D) the amount (if any) allocated under paragraph (3) to
such State by the Secretary.
For purposes of subparagraph (A), the unused State
environmental remediation credit ceiling for any calendar
year is the excess (if any) of the sum of the amounts
described in subparagraphs (B), (C), and (D) over the
aggregate environmental remediation credit amount allocated
for such year.
``(2) National environmental remediation credit
limitation.--
``(A) In general.--The national environmental remediation
credit limitation for each calendar year is $1,000,000,000.
``(B) State's share of limitation.--A State's share of such
limitation is the amount which bears the same ratio to the
limitation applicable under subparagraph (A) for the calendar
year as such State's population bears to the population of
the United States.
``(3) Unused environmental remediation credit carryovers
allocated among certain states.--
``(A) In general.--The unused environmental remediation
credit carryover of a State for any calendar year shall be
assigned to the Secretary for allocation among qualified
States for the succeeding calendar year.
``(B) Unused environmental remediation credit carryover.--
For purposes of this paragraph, the unused environmental
remediation credit carryover of a State for any calendar year
is the excess (if any) of--
``(i) the unused State environmental remediation credit
ceiling for the year preceding such year, over
``(ii) the aggregate environmental remediation credit
amount allocated for such year.
``(C) Formula for allocation of unused environmental
remediation credit carryovers among qualified states.--Rules
similar to the rules of clauses (iii) and (iv) of section
42(h)(3)(D) shall apply for purposes of this paragraph.
``(4) Population.--For purposes of this subsection,
population shall be determined in accordance with section
146(j).
``(5) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any calendar
year after 2004, the $1,000,000,000 amount contained in
paragraph (2) shall be increased by an amount equal to--
``(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by
``(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under
section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year, determined by
substituting `calendar year 2003' for `calendar year 1992' in
subparagraph (B) thereof.
Any increase determined under the preceding sentence shall be
rounded to the nearest multiple of $500,000.
``(e) Eligible Area; Other Definitions.--For purposes of
this section--
``(1) Eligible area.--
``(A) In general.--The term `eligible area' means the
entire area encompassed by a local governmental unit if such
area contains at least 1 census tract having a poverty rate
of at least 20 percent.
``(B) Areas not within census tracts.--In the case of an
area which is not tracted for population census tracts, the
equivalent county divisions (as defined by the Bureau of the
Census for purposes of defining poverty areas) shall be used
for purposes of determining poverty rates.
``(C) Use of census data.--Population and poverty rate
shall be determined by the most recent decennial census data
available.
``(2) Qualified contaminated site.--The term `qualified
contaminated site' has the meaning given to such term by
section 198, determined by treating petroleum and petroleum
by-products as hazardous substances.
``(3) Possessions treated as states.--The term `State'
includes a possession of the United States.
``(f) Credit May Be Assigned.--
``(1) In general.--If a taxpayer elects the application of
this subsection for any taxable year, the amount of credit
determined under this section for such year which would (but
for this subsection) be allowable to the taxpayer shall be
allowable to the person designated by the taxpayer. The
person so designated shall be treated as the taxpayer for
purposes of subsection (h).
``(2) Treatment of amounts paid for assignment.--If any
amount is paid to the person who assigns the credit
determined under this section, no portion of such amount or
such credit shall be includible in the payee's gross income.
``(g) Treatment of Potential Responsible Parties.--
``(1) In general.--No credit shall be allowed under this
section to any potential responsible party (within the
meaning of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980) with respect to any
qualified contaminated site (including by reason of receiving
an assignment of the credit under subsection (f)) unless at
least 25 percent of the cost of remediating such site is
borne by such party.
``(2) Relief from liability for other 75 percent.--If the
requirement of paragraph (1) is met by a potential
responsible party, such party shall not be liable under any
Federal law for any cost taken into account in determining
whether such requirement is met.
``(3) Amounts paid for credit assignment not eligible.--
Amounts paid by a potential responsible party to any person
for the assignment by such person of the credit under
subsection (f)) shall not be taken into account in
determining whether the requirement of paragraph (1) is met.
``(h) Recapture of Credit if Environmental Remediation Not
Properly Completed.--
``(1) In general.--If the State development agency of the
State in which the qualified contaminated site is located
determines that the environmental remediation which is part
of the approved remediation and redevelopment plan for such
site was not properly completed, then the taxpayer's tax
under this chapter for the taxable year in which such
determination is made shall be increased by the credit
recapture amount.
``(2) Credit recapture amount.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the credit recapture amount is an amount equal to the
sum of--
``(A) the aggregate decrease in the credits allowed to the
taxpayer under section 38 for all prior taxable years which
would have resulted if the credit allowable by reason of this
section were not allowed, plus
``(B) interest at the overpayment rate established under
section 6621 on the amount determined under subparagraph (A)
for each prior taxable year for the period beginning on the
due date for filing the return for the prior taxable year
involved.
No deduction shall be allowed under this chapter for interest
described in subparagraph (B).
``(3) Special rules.--
``(A) Tax benefit rule.--The tax for the taxable year shall
be increased under paragraph (1) only with respect to credits
allowed by reason of this section which were used to reduce
tax liability. In the case of credits not so used to reduce
tax liability, the carryforwards and carrybacks under section
39 shall be appropriately adjusted.
``(B) No credits against tax.--Any increase in tax under
this subsection shall not be treated as a tax imposed by this
chapter for purposes of determining the amount of any credit
or the tax imposed by section 55.
``(i) Denial of Double Benefit.--
``(1) In general.--No deduction shall be allowed for that
portion of the qualified remediation expenditures otherwise
allowable as a deduction for the taxable year which is equal
to the amount of the credit determined for such taxable year
under this section.
``(2) Similar rule where taxpayer capitalizes rather than
deducts expenses.--If--
``(A) the amount of the credit determined for the taxable
year under this section, exceeds
``(B) the amount allowable as a deduction for such taxable
year for qualified remediation expenditures (determined
without regard to paragraph (1)),
the amount chargeable to capital account for the taxable year
for such expenditures shall be reduced by the amount of such
excess.
``(3) Controlled groups.--In the case of a corporation
which is a member of a controlled group of corporations
(within the meaning of section 52(a)) or a trade or business
which is treated as being under common control with other
trades or businesses (within the meaning of section 52(b)),
this subsection shall be applied under rules prescribed by
the Secretary similar to the rules applicable under
subsections (a) and (b) of section 52.''
(b) Credit Treated as Business Credit.--Section 38(b) of
such Code is amended by striking ``plus'' at the end of
paragraph (14), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (15) and inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(16) the environmental remediation credit determined
under section 45G(a).''.
(c) No Carrybacks Before Effective Date.--Subsection (d) of
section 39 of such Code (relating to carryback and
carryforward of unused credits) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(11) No carryback of section 45g credit before effective
date.--No portion of the unused business credit for any
taxable year which is attributable to the environmental
remediation credit determined under section 45G may be
carried back to a taxable year ending before the date of the
enactment of section 45G.''.
(d) Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections for
subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such
Code is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
``Sec. 45G. Environmental remediation credit.''.
[[Page S10727]]
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. McConnell, and Mr. McCain):
S. 2931. A bill to enable drivers to choose a more affordable form of
auto insurance that also provides for more adequate and timely
compensation for accident victims, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. Chairman, on behalf of my co-sponsors, Senators
McConnell and McCain, I rise today to introduce legislation that I
believe has the potential to improve profoundly the lives of millions
of Americans across the country.
The Auto Choice Reform Act of 2004 offers a real solution to a very
real problem faced by those of us who drive every day--the high cost
and inadequate compensation of the current tort and liability
automotive insurance system.
The tort system ought to ideally compensate people injured by
negligence and deter others from acting irresponsibly. With respect to
auto accidents, the system fails miserably on both counts.
Numerous studies over the past 75 years document just how poorly the
tort system compensates injured people. Almost one-third of injured
people recover nothing at all, and many injured persons who do recover
compensation must wait years to receive payment from the other person's
insurer.
Worst of all, people with minor injuries recover compensation far in
excess of their actual losses while many people with serious injuries
are grossly underpaid. The RAND Institute for Civil Justice has found
that people with economic losses between $500 and $1,000 recover on
average 2\1/2\ times their economic loss. This is largely due to the
fact that it is cheaper for an insurer to pay a questionable claim than
to pay the costs of going to court, where they risk paying a multiplier
of economic damages for pain and suffering.
The perverse incentives generated by pain-and-suffering damage awards
also cause rampant fraud and abuse in auto insurance claims. A study by
the RAND Institute for Civil Justice confirms that between 35 and 42
percent of medical costs claimed in auto accidents occur in response to
the incentives of the tort liability system. In other words, more than
one-third of all medical losses claimed in auto accidents are
fraudulent or exaggerated--attempts to nab the pain-and-suffering
jackpot.
On the other hand, people with the highest economic losses, in excess
of $100,000, recover only 9 percent of their economic loss on average.
To add injury to insult, that amount doesn't even include their
lawyers' standard one-third fee. Because most drivers don't carry
enough insurance to even pay this level of economic loss, particularly
after attorneys' fees are deducted, people with the most serious
injuries rarely recover anything for pain-and-suffering.
In short, we would be hard pressed to design a worse compensation
system if we tried.
Indeed, the system is so bankrupt that lawyers in the auto insurance
litigation currently consume more than 25 cents out of every premium
dollar spent, an amount that is significantly more than the amount
received by those actually injured for medical bills and lost wages. In
total, more than $16 billion went to lawyers in 2001 for automobile
related personal injury cases.
What about deterrence? Perhaps it is worth paying for a poor
compensation system if people are deterred from driving badly, thereby
avoiding injuries in the first place. Some studies have made this
argument but the most comprehensive analysis of accident data, again by
the RAND Institute for Civil Justice, has found that the tort system
has little or no deterrent impact. This conclusion is a logical one. If
a driver is not deterred by the threat of personal danger from reckless
driving, then surely that driver is not deterred by the penalty for
reckless driving--simply a modest increase in one's insurance premium.
The current system is also unnecessarily expensive, as is clearly
demonstrated by the fact that the Joint Economic Committee estimates
that switching to the new Personal Injury Protection system, discussed
below, which relies primarily on the payment of economic losses for all
injured persons without regard to fault and largely without the need
for lawsuits, could save drivers a total of $48 billion a year in
unnecessary premiums.
Excessive premiums disproportionately impact low income Americans and
welfare recipients. Families in the bottom 20 percent of incomes who
buy auto insurance spend 16 percent of their household income on that
insurance. That percentage is seven times the proportion that families
in the top 20 percent spend. Lower premiums would enable many low
income workers to afford the cars they need to travel to better-paying
jobs. The Auto Choice reform legislation we are proposing today would
reduce premiums for low income people by more than it would reduce them
for the average driver--both in terms of percentages and often in terms
of absolute dollars. And all drivers would see significantly lower
premiums.
Auto Choice is designed to allow consumers to choose the type of
insurance that meets their needs and to opt out of the pain-and-
suffering litigation lottery associated with the current system.
Essentially, drivers are permitted under Auto Choice to choose a new
Personal Injury Protection, ``PIP'', Insurance under which they would
be compensated without regard to fault for all economic losses up to
their policy limits by their own insurance company, with nothing
available for pain and suffering. Alternatively, for those who remain
in the current tort system, they will select a small amount of
additional coverage similar to an uninsured motorist for situations
involving another motorist that opted for the PIP system--a premium
offset by the savings realized by everyone as a result of the overall
shift away from the lawsuit system.
The system does not abolish lawsuits. By design, there will be
reduced incentives to head straight to court, but the right to sue
remains firmly intact--as injured parties not fully compensated can sue
to recover excess economic losses over and above that covered by the
PIP coverage and other sources of first party insurance. They can also
sue for all damages, including pain and suffering, when the accident is
caused by a driver who is drunk or on drugs.
In summary, if a driver wants to maintain the possibility of
recovering for pain and suffering, he will stay in essentially the
current system. On the other hand, if he wants to opt-out of the
current system in exchange for lower premiums with prompt compensation
for economic losses--then he instead will choose the personal injury
protection system.
The idea is not a new one. Indeed, this idea has been discussed--and
even introduced in one form or another--for over thirty years now.
Several versions of Auto Choice reform have enjoyed broad support on
both sides of the aisle. Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Steve Forbes,
Michael Dukakis, Mayor Rudy Guliani, Congressman Dick Armey--just to
name a few--have all opined in support of giving drivers a way out of
the current ineffective system.
The time has come for Congress to act. The results of our action are
clear and tangible: were Congress to enact Auto Choice Reform
legislation now, motorists would stand to save as much as $48 billion
next year.
Think about that for just one moment. Over 5 years, Americans would
be able to save almost $250 billion--savings tantamount to a massive
tax cut with absolutely no negative impact to the Federal deficit.
And what does this mean for the average American? The average
American family with two cars will be able to save nearly $380 a year,
according to Joint Economic Committee estimates.
Particularly encouraging is the effect these savings will have for
low income families. Lower auto insurance premiums will make owning a
car more affordable for poor Americans, allowing them to find and keep
better-paying jobs and have longer commutes. Auto Choice would allow
low-income drivers to save almost 37 percent on their overall
automobile premium. For a low-income household, these savings
[[Page S10728]]
are the equivalent of 5 weeks of groceries or nearly 4 months of
electric bills.
Auto Choice Reform can provide immediate and real relief for average,
mainstream American families across the country. Those are real
savings, resulting from a sound system that offers legitimate choice--a
choice between guaranteed upfront savings on insurance premiums on one
hand; and on the other, the right to sue for non-economic damages such
as pain and suffering in the event an accident one day occurs.
For most Americans, I believe the choice is an easy one.
Unfortunately, for most Americans today, that choice is unavailable.
The Auto Choice Reform Act of 2004 gives the American people that
choice. Let's get government back to doing what it ought to--protecting
the rights of all Americans to have the freedom to make choices about
how they live their lives.
______
By Mr. DODD (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Johnson, and Mr.
Wyden):
S. 2933. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to expand the
clinical trials drug data bank; to the Committee on Health, Education,
Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Fair Access to
Clinical Trials (FACT) Act. I want to begin by thanking Senator
Kennedy, Senator Johnson, and Senator Wyden for joining me in
introducing this legislation. Our bill will create a clinical trials
registry--an electronic database--for drugs, biological products, and
medical devices. Such a registry will ensure that physicians, the
general public, and patients seeking to enroll in clinical trials have
access to basic information about those trials. It will require
manufacturers and other researchers to reveal the results of clinical
trials so that clinically important information will be available to
all Americans, and physicians will have all the necessary information
to make appropriate treatment decisions for their patients.
Events of the past several months have made it clear that such a
registry is needed. Serious questions have been raised about the
effectiveness and safety of antidepressants when used in children and
youth. It has now become clear that the existing data indicates that
these drugs may very well put children at risk. However, because the
data from antidepressant clinical trials was not publicly available, it
took years for this risk to be realized. In the meantime, millions of
children have been prescribed antidepressants by well-meaning
physicians. While these drugs undoubtedly helped many of these
children, they also led to greater suffering for others.
Unfortunately, antidepressants are just one example of a story that
has become all too common. In the case of antidepressants, negative
data might actually have been suppressed, and if this is discovered to
be the case, those responsible should be dealt with harshly. However,
because of what is known as ``publication bias,'' the information
available to the public and physicians can be misleading even without
nefarious motives. The simple fact is that a study with a positive
result is far more likely to be published, and thus publicly available,
than a study with a negative result. Physicians and patients hear the
good news, but rarely the bad news. In the end, the imbalance of
available information hurts patients.
Our bill would correct the imbalance of information, and prevent
manufacturers from suppressing negative data. It would do so by
expanding clinicaltrials.gov, an existing registry that is operated by
the National Library of Medicine (NLM). Currently, clinicaltrials.gov
includes information for patients seeking to enroll in clinical trials
for drugs to treat serious or life-threatening conditions. The FACT Act
would expand the registry to include all trials (except for preliminary
safety trials), and would also require the submission of results data.
At the same time, the bill would ensure that clinicaltrials.gov
continues to operate as a resource for patients seeking to enroll in
trials.
Our legislation would enforce the requirement to register trials in
two ways. First, by requiring registration as a condition of
Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, no trial could begin without
submitting preliminary information to the registry. This information
would include the purpose of the trial, the estimated date of trial
completion, as well as all of the information necessary to help
patients to enroll in the trial.
Once the trial is completed, the researcher or manufacturer is
required to submit the results to the registry. If they refuse to do
so, they are subject to monetary penalties or, in the case of federally
funded research, a restriction on future funding. It is my belief that
these enforcement mechanisms will ensure broad compliance. However, in
the rare case where a manufacturer does not comply, this legislation
also gives the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the authority to
publicize the required information.
Let me also say that any time you are collecting large amounts of
data and making it public, protecting patient privacy and
confidentiality must be paramount. Our legislation would in no way
threaten that privacy. The simple fact is that under this bill, no
individually identifiable information would be available to the public.
I believe that the establishment of a clinical trials registry is
absolutely necessary for the health and well-being of the American
public. But I would also like to highlight two other benefits that such
a registry will have. First, it has the potential to reduce health care
costs. Studies have shown that publication bias also leads to a bias
towards new and more expensive treatment options. A registry could help
make it clear that, in some cases, less expensive treatments are just
as effective for patients.
In addition, a registry will ensure that the sacrifice made by
patients who enroll in clinical trials is not squandered. Many patients
would be less willing to participate in trials if they understood that
the data are unlikely to be made public if the results of the trial are
negative. We owe it to patients to make sure that their participation
in a trial will benefit other individuals suffering from the same
illness or condition.
The problems associated with publication bias have recently drawn
more attention from the medical community, and there is broad consensus
that a clinical trials registry is one of the best ways to address the
issue. Accordingly, the American Medical Association (AMA) has
recommended the creation of such a registry, and the major medical
journals have established a policy that they will only publish the
results of trials that were registered in a public database before the
trial began. Our legislation meets all of the minimum criteria for a
trial registry set out by the International Committee of Medical
Journal Editors.
To its credit, the pharmaceutical industry has also acknowledged the
problem, and has created a registry to which manufacturers can
voluntarily submit clinical trials data. I applaud this step. However,
if our objective is to provide the public with a complete and
consistent supply of information, a voluntary registry is unlikely to
achieve that goal. Some companies will provide information, but others
may decide not to participate. We need a clinical trials framework that
is not just fair to all companies, but provides patients with peace of
mind that they will receive complete information about the medicines
they rely on.
The American drug industry is an extraordinary success story. As a
result of the innovations that this industry has spawned, millions of
lives have been improved and saved in our country and around the globe.
Because of the importance of these medicines to our health and well-
being, I have consistently supported sound public policies to help the
industry to succeed. This legislation aims to build upon the successes
of this industry, and help ensure that the positive changes to our
health care system that prescription drugs have brought are not
undermined by controversies such as the one now surrounding
antidepressants, which is at least in part based on a lack of public
information. This bill will help ensure that new and innovative
medicines will be used by well-informed patients.
I look forward to working with industry, physicians, the medical
journals, patient groups, and my colleagues to
[[Page S10729]]
move this legislation forward. This bill has already been endorsed by
the National Organization for Rare Disorders, Consumers Union, the
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, and the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. I thank these organizations for
lending their expertise as we crafted this legislation, and I ask that
a copy of their letters of endorsement be included in the Record after
this statement.
Clinical trials are critical to protecting the safety and health of
the American public, and for this reason, trial results must not be
treated as information that can be hidden from scrutiny. Recent events
have made it clear that a clinical trials registry is needed. Patients
and physicians agree that such a registry is in the interest of the
public health. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I
am hopeful that it will become law as soon as possible.
There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that letters of support be
printed in the Record.
National Organization for
Rare Disorders, Inc.,
Danbury, CT, October 7, 2004.
Hon. Christopher Dodd,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Dodd: The National Organization for Rare
Disorders (NORD) is honored to support your efforts to
establish a centralized and comprehensive registry of both
public and privately funded clinical research. The ``Fair
Access to Clinical Trials Act of 2004'' will provide the
mechanism whereby patients, including those living with rare
diseases, will have access to ALL clinical research data--
both positive and negative--something NORD has supported for
many years.
There are over 25 million Americans currently living with
one of the 6,000 known rare diseases. Unfortunately, for most
of these diseases, little, if any, research is conducted.
Thus, finding a trial is like trying to locate a needle in a
massive haystack. Without your help, patients will continue
to struggle to somehow find a clinical trial in the hopes
that a therapy to alleviate symptoms or cure their disease
may someday be found.
NORD also applauds the ``FACT Act'' because it will
penalize industry when they purposefully and willfully hide
negative data only to their bottom line. It is unconscionable
to think that harmful information has been shielded from
patients and healthcare providers, causing irreparable harm,
and sometimes death.
Senator Dodd, NORD thanks you for your continuing concern
about the health and welfare of all Americans. We will work
with you to ensure that the ``Fair Access to Clinical Trials
Act of 2004'' becomes a reality.
Sincerely.
Diane E. Dorman,
Vice President.
____
Consumers Union,
October 7, 2004.
Hon. Christopher J. Dodd,
Hon. Edward M. Kennedy,
Hon. Tim Johnson,
Hon. Ron Wyden,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senators Dodd, Kennedy, Johnson, and Wyden: Consumers
Union, the non-profit publisher of Consumer Reports magazine,
commends you for introducing the ``Fair Access to Clinical
Trials Act of 2004'' (FACT Act). The legislation would create
a mandatory publicly available national registry of all
clinical trials involving drugs, biological products, and
devices. This bill would enable consumers, doctors, and other
health care providers to make appropriate decisions about
care based upon more complete and accurate safety, efficacy,
and comparative-effectiveness data.
The recent episode involving Paxil, one of the most popular
antidepressants on the market, underscores a potentially
dangerous information gap in drug regulation: the ability of
drug manufacturers to effectively conceal study results that
reveal their products to be ineffective or potentially
hazardous. The number of U.S. children taking antidepressants
has more than doubled since the early 1990s. In the past
year, new evidence has emerged suggesting a possible
connection between children starting antidepressant treatment
and an increase in suicide risk. The public was disturbed to
learn that Paxil's manufacturer, GlaxoSmithKline, submitted
three studies to the FDA when it sought approval for
pediatric use. The only one of the three studies that showed
that Paxil worked for depression was published in the Journal
of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
This article disguised evidence of potential suicidal
thoughts by calling them ``emotional lability.'' However the
two additional negative Paxil studies were never published in
any journal. Meanwhile, doctors continued to prescribe Paxil
for children--an estimated 2.1 million prescriptions in 2002
alone.
Your legislation would begin to close the gap in the
disclosure of information discovered during clinical trials.
It would require trial sponsors to register publicly and
privately funded clinical trials of drugs, biological
products, and medical devices. The registry will further the
goal of transparency by making information publicly available
about trials, including: the purpose of the trial; whether
the trial focuses on an unapproved use; a description of
primary and secondary outcomes to be studied; the estimated
completion date; the actual completion date (and the reasons
for any difference from the estimated completion date); a
summary of the trial results; adverse events observed during
the investigation; and a description of the protocol followed
in the trial.
Under the bill, before receiving Federal funding, a
principal investigator would be required to certify that it
will comply with the bill's registration requirements.
Failure to submit trial result information could result in
its inability to receive future federally funded contracts.
Sponsors of privately funded trials also would be required to
disclose the same information, or face potential civil
penalties. If any trial sponsor fails to comply with the
registration requirements, the Secretary of the Department of
Health and Human Services is directed to disclose in the
registry that the sponsor has failed to turn over trial
results.
Strong incentives and penalties must be in place in order
to ensure that pharmaceutical companies do not suppress
negative safety or efficacy information in order to boost
their profits. These practices are unacceptable, and we look
forward to working with you to ensure transparency for
clinical trial results, and to create even stronger
incentives and penalties in the legislation to remove any
financial motive clinical trial sponsors may have to hide
important health information from consumers.
Sincerely,
Janell Mayo Duncan,
Legislative and Regulatory Counsel,
Washington Office.
____
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric
AIDS Foundation,
October 7, 2004.
Hon. Christopher J. Dodd,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Tim Johnson,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Edward M. Kennedy,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Ron Wyden,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senators Dodd, Kennedy, Johnson and Wyden: On behalf
of the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, I would
like to commend your leadership in introducing the ``Fair
Access to Clinical Trials Act of 2004'' (The FACT Act) and
offer our strong endorsement of your efforts to establish a
publicly accessible registry of clinical trials, including
important pediatric studies.
The Foundation was created more than 15 years ago to help
children with HIV/AIDS and is now the worldwide leader in the
fight against pediatric AIDS and other serious and life-
threatening diseases affecting children. In 2000, the Glaser
Pediatric Research Network was founded as an affiliate of the
Foundation, with the goal of advancing vital clinical
discoveries on behalf of all children. Through a partnership
among five pre-eminent academic medical centers, the Network
is currently supporting clinical drug trials and other
pediatric studies on a range of conditions affecting children
such as obesity, cancer, osteoporosis, and rare bleeding
disorders.
As longstanding advocates of testing drugs for use in
children, we welcome the dramatic increase in pediatric
studies that has resulted from the enactment of both
incentives and a pediatric testing requirement. However,
simply conducting pediatric research is insufficient if the
results of that research are not made fully available to
pediatricians, parents, and researchers. By making clinical
trial information publicly accessible in a timely way, the
FACT Act will serve as a critical next step in improving the
safety and efficacy of medicines used by children.
We are particularly pleased that the FACT Act acknowledges
the unique circumstances and contributions of non-profit
sponsors of research. Your attention to the need to ensure
the continued viability of critical research partnerships
between non-profit and for-profit funders is very much
appreciated. In addition, as we continue our efforts to
improve the availability of medical devices designed for
children's unique needs, we applaud your inclusion of device
clinical trials in the scope of the registry.
Thank you again for your commitment to ensuring that
important safety data from pediatric and adult clinical
trials is available to improve public health. We look forward
to working with you in the 109th Congress to secure
bipartisan support for and passage of this important
legislation.
Sincerely,
Mark Isaac,
Vice President, Policy and Communication.
____
American Academy of Child &
Adolescent Psychiatry,
Washington, DC, October 7, 2004.
Hon. Christopher Dodd
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Dodd: On behalf of the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (AACAP), thank you for your
efforts to improve the health of children, adolescents and
adults through better access to
[[Page S10730]]
clinical trial data. Legislation that you are sponsoring, the
Fair Access to Clinical Trials (FACT) Act, will ensure that
physicians, including child and adolescent psychiatrists,
patients and parents have all available knowledge about a
medication's safety and effectiveness, so that they can make
informed decisions about treatment options.
The AACAP is pleased to have been at the forefront of
calling for a national clinical trails registry. Research is
key to understanding the cause of depression, especially in
children and adolescents, and access to all research findings
will help clinicians develop the most effective treatment
plans. It is this principle that led the AACAP and the
American Psychiatric Association (APA) to urge the American
Medical Association to join their call for a national
registry, which it did earlier this year.
Again, we thank you for sponsoring the Fair Access to
Clinical Trials Act. We are encouraged by the support for
this bill and are eager to work with you to ensure its
passage. Please contact Nuala S. Moore, Asst. Director of
Government Affairs, at 202.966.7300, x. 126, if you have any
questions concerning clinical research or other children's
mental illness issues.
Sincerely,
Richard Sarles, M.D.,
President.
Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. President, today I join several of my colleagues in
introducing a very important piece of legislation that will improve
access to information about prescription drugs for patients and their
doctors. Today Senators Dodd, Kennedy and Wyden and I are introducing
the Fair Access to Clinical Trials Act, or FACT Act. I want to commend
my colleagues for their hard work on this legislation. I also want to
thank them for their commitment to ensuring that finally, objective,
unbiased information can be put in the hands of consumers and doctors,
reducing negative outcomes, improving patient care and ultimately
reducing costs of medications.
It is unacceptable that today, much of the information consumers and
doctors rely on to make decisions about the medications they use are
based on incomplete information. Patients are often swayed by direct-
to-consumer drug advertisements. Doctors must rely on the information
they learn at drug company sponsored conferences, and in peer reviewed
journals that publish largely the success stories. But what about the
untold stories? What about the clinical trials that were discontinued
by drug companies because the data appeared to not be going in the
right direction? What about the studies that are part of an application
for a new drug that may show a negative result? And what about trials
that have been conducted to study the appropriateness of an off-label
use? Today, physicians and their patients do not have access to any of
this important information, and that must change now.
The lack of access to this information can have real, devastating
effects on patients. We have all heard the stories in the papers in
recent months. We have heard about New York Attorney General Eliot
Spitzer's lawsuit, which charged GlaxoSmithKline with suppressing the
publication of studies suggesting that its antidepressant drug Paxil
could increase the risk of suicide among adolescents. Further
investigation of this issue has found that some manufacturers of
antidepressants highlighted positive findings in tests on youngsters
while playing down negative or inconclusive ones.
We have just recently learned that the arthritis medication Vioxx was
pulled off the market, due to negative study findings, and just
yesterday learned that over 27,000 sudden cardiac deaths and heart
attacks may have been caused. While Merck did the right thing by
pulling the drug after learning of clinical trial, they were under no
obligation to share this information with consumers or the medical
profession. Drug companies have lobbied to ensure that only the Food
and Drug Administration gets this information and, even then, some drug
companies simply discontinue studies that they do not think will
reflect favorably on their product.
What doctors advocating the development of a comprehensive clinical
trial registry have indicated is that without ready access to all
experimental data, good, bad and indifferent, they cannot hope to know
what is the best treatment for their patients. Our legislation will get
at that very issue, by requiring that clinical trials are registered in
a database that is accessible to the public.
This bill will create a comprehensive clinical trial database, which
will require that all trials for drugs, biologics, and medical devices
be registered in the database in order to obtain approval from a U.S.
Institutional Review Board to move forward with any study. Researchers
will be required to disclose basic information about a study initially,
so that consumers can be aware of studies while they are underway.
Once trials are completed, the bill requires that the results of
those studies be made available to doctors and patients. There is
significant time allowed in the bill for researchers to publish their
results, prior to them being made public in the database. Submission to
this database will be mandatory for all federally funded and non-
federally funded trials, and strong enforcement mechanisms are
incorporated into the bill.
Making the results of clinical drug trials public is not only a good
consumer right-to-know or rather need-to-know issue, but it is also the
ethically responsible thing to do. Patients enter trials for the good
of science. It is our obligation to ensure that their sacrifices
provide for the greater good of the public health. Publicizing the
results of those studies is a step in that direction. Patients
enrolling in clinical trials often know up front that the likely chance
of directly benefiting from a treatment is unknown. But patients are
also told that even if they do not experience a positive outcome,
doctors can learn from the results, which will advance science in the
long term.
This legislation is strongly supported by the National Organization
for Rare Disorders, Consumers Union and the Academy of Child and
Adolescent Psychiatry. I urge my colleagues to support this important
legislation which is long overdue.
Mr. KENNEDY. I am pleased today to introduce the Fair Access to
Clinical Trials or FACT Act. This needed legislation will improve the
information available to patients and their families about the medical
treatments they receive. For too long, drug companies have been able to
hide damaging data that show their new wonder drug is not really the
wonder they claim it to be. That practice ends on the day the FACT Act
is enacted. From that day forward, consumers, doctors and researchers
will have access to the results of clinical trials, so they can make
informed decisions about treatment options.
No patient should ever die because they didn't get the information
they needed on the medications they rely on to protect their health.
The legislation we introduce today is offered by a strong group of
Senators and Representatives from across the nation. I commend my
colleague, Senator Dodd, for his leadership in the Senate on this
important measure. Senator Dodd has a strong and lasting commitment to
improving the health and health care of all our citizens, and
particularly for the youngest and most vulnerable. I am also pleased to
join Senator Ron Wyden and Senator Tim Johnson in introducing this
proposal, and I commend them for their commitment and skillful
leadership in this area.
Our colleagues in the House of Representatives are today introducing
almost identical legislation, and I commend our colleagues,
Representative Ed Markey and Representative Henry Waxman, for their
tireless efforts on this important issue.
As part of the FDA Modernization Act, Congress directed the
Department of Health and Human Services to establish a registry of
clinical trials. This provision was well timed, because it coincided
with the rapid expansion of internet use. As a result, the National
Library of Medicine has established a web site, clinicaltrials.gov,
that is intended to contain information on all clinical trials for
serious and life threatening diseases.
Sadly, recent studies show that drug manufacturers are not complying
with the requirement to list even basic information on the trials they
conduct. A recent study showed that only 48 percent of the required
cancer trials were properly submitted to the registry, and rates for
other serious diseases were in the single digits. As a result of this
shameful failure, patients are being denied important information on
clinical trials in which they may be eligible to participate.
[[Page S10731]]
Action is long overdue to give the NIH and the FDA better ways to see
that companies and researchers properly register the trials they
conduct. The FACT Act will assure that any researcher or sponsor
seeking to conduct a clinical trial will be required, as a condition
for approval to conduct the trial, to submit information on that trial
to the clinical trial registry. This common-sense provision will see
that patients seeking to enroll in clinical trials will have access to
a complete set of information on the trials for which they may be
eligible. No patient should be denied access to a lifesaving clinical
trial because the sponsor of the trial shirked their responsibility to
submit information to the national registry.
Ensuring that all trials are registered is important, but
registration alone is not enough to see that patients get the
information they need on the treatments they receive. We must also see
that the results of clinical trials are included in the registry.
The FACT Act requires researchers and clinical trial sponsors to
submit the results of their trials to the registry. With a complete and
comprehensive set of information, patients will be better able to
evaluate the treatments they receive, and physicians will have access
to complete information on the treatments they prescribe. The FACT Act
requires companies to list the results of trials--even when they show
that a product is less effective than its manufacturers want to claim.
All of us are familiar with the way that drug companies hid
information on potentially harmful side effects in children of
antidepressants. Many of our Republican colleagues in the House
forcefully criticized the FDA for failing to release information they
possessed showing that these pills sometimes cause suicidal tendencies
in the children who received them.
The FACT Act addresses both of these serious concerns. It requires
companies to list the results of their trials, and gives FDA the
authority to impose civil monetary penalties on those who fail to do
so. It also gives FDA the clear legal authority to release information
on the results of a clinical trial if a company fails to do so. No
longer will FDA face the terrible dilemma of knowing that it possesses
information crucial to assuring public health and safety, but is unable
to release that information to the public because of legal constraints.
The FACT Act assures that FDA has the clear authority to take the steps
it needs to take to protect public health.
I urge Congress to take swift action on the proposals introduced
today in the House and Senate. We have little time left in this
session, but the measures introduced today have broad support from
medical professional, consumer organizations and the publishers of
professional journals.
Some companies have already taken voluntary steps to release
information on clinical trials. These voluntary efforts are
commendable, but they are inadequate to give the public the
comprehensive information they need and deserve. Voluntary reporting
efforts on the companies' own web sites will not result in a single,
central database that every patient can consult. Sporadic efforts by
individual companies will not elicit the comprehensive information
needed on all clinical trials--not just those of the few companies that
participate in the voluntary initiative. And voluntary efforts
undertaken now may not be sustained in the future, when the hot glare
of public attention fades from this issue.
To give patients and health professionals the information they need
to improve the quality of medical care, we need a strong legal
requirement to list comprehensive information on clinical trials in a
single publicly accessible database. Patients and their families
deserve the FACT Act, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I join Senators Dodd, Kennedy, and
Johnson in introducing the Fair Access to Clinical Trials Act of 2004.
This legislation is an important milestone for patients and doctors
around this country because it would create a centralized clinical
trials registry by expanding the current clinical trials.gov website to
provide not only information about clinical trials they might want to
be part of, but also the results of those trials. If information is not
provided so it can be posted on the website, serious penalties could be
imposed, including a researcher losing their ability to get future
Federal grants.
It is vitally important that patients and their doctors have the
information they need to decide upon the best treatment for them. As we
all know, drugs are often the key treatment for many health problems.
Good results about the safety and effectiveness of treatments are often
trumpeted by drug companies and the media, but Americans are less
likely to hear about clinical trial results that are not so good or
truly negative. This legislation will ensure that everyone can get a
fair picture of all results of clinical trials.
I believe that this legislation strikes the delicate balance needed
so that companies which create breakthrough drugs can keep their trade
secrets, the important process of assuring peer review in medical
literature can continue, and consumers, doctors and researchers can
have access to the information they need to make sound decisions about
their health care.
Research is key in assuring health care improvements. Knowing the
results of research is key in assuring better health care quality and
improving decision-making by doctors and their patients. I believe that
the expanded website created by this legislation will be an important
tool in improving doctors' and patients' knowledge and decision-making
that might well mean life or death for some patients.
______
By Ms. CANTWELL:
S. 2934. A bill to combat methamphetamine abuse in the United States;
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the
Confronting Methamphetamines Act of 2004.
Methamphetamine, meth, use is growing exponentially in parts of our
country and is spreading across the country at an alarming rate. We
must act aggressively to attack the meth problem with a long-term
commitment of resources or we will soon have a national drug crisis on
the scale of an epidemic.
Meth is an extremely dangerous and highly addictive drug. Individuals
who use meth risk becoming addicted to this life-destroying drug with
just one use. Meth use has ruined the lives of many people who prior to
their addiction to meth were successful contributors to our society and
our economy.
Meth use triggers an avalanche of other problems for addicts'
families and our communities. The use of meth is often linked to child
abuse and the destruction of families. It contributes substantially to
the perpetration of violent crimes, particularly burglary and crimes of
substantial cost and personal pain to the victims, including identity
theft. The stories I have heard about meth users are horrible--parents
so focused on feeding their habit that they forget their children are
right there with them, hungry, and without any love or care. Users
become aggressive, violent and unstable. Often, the kids end up users
as well.
Sadly, our children are discovering meth, and the results will be
devastating. According to a 2001 study by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, nearly one in ten high school students have
used meth. The statistics are clear: the problem is bad, and it's
getting worse. The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at
Columbia University reports that while the proportion of teens who know
users of LSD, cocaine, and heroin has dropped sharply from last year,
the percentage of teens who know a user of methamphetamines has risen
from 12 percent in 2003 to 15 percent this year.
The devastation to our kids' lives is hitting our rural communities
first. The Columbia University researchers also found that eighth
graders living in rural America are 104 percent more likely to use
amphetamines than eighth graders in urban areas.
And meth is not just a health and social problem; it is also an
enormous environmental problem. There are two types of local meth labs:
so-called ``super-labs,'' which are capable of manufacturing large
volumes of methamphetamines and clandestine labs set up by users to
manufacture small amounts of the drug for personal use. These
clandestine labs can be set up in the woods, in hotel rooms or even in
the back seat of a car. They can be
[[Page S10732]]
set up anywhere, but are usually located where there is little traffic
or population.
These hazardous ``labs'' can go unnoticed for years, but they produce
major chemical hazards and pose severe fire risk. Meth production
generates extremely hazardous byproducts, such as anhydrous ammonia,
ether, sulfuric acid, as well as other toxins that are volatile,
corrosive, and poisonous. When these substances are illegally disposed
of in rivers, streams and other dump areas, explosions and serious
environmental damage can and does result. Our State and local
environmental agencies are responsible to cleanup these hazardous sites
and it is taking a toll on their resources.
The use of meth is spreading rapidly from the western region of the
United States across the rural Midwest and to the east. The spreading
availability of methamphetamine is illustrated by increasing numbers of
meth seizures, arrests, indictments, and sentences. And those numbers
are rising across the country. According to the National Drug
Intelligence Center, methamphetamine is widely available throughout the
Pacific, Southwest, and West Central regions and is increasingly
available in the Great Lakes and the Southeast.
Similarly, the National Institute on Drug Abuse's Community
Epidemiology Working Group reports that, in 2002, methamphetamine
indicators remained highest in West Coast areas and parts of the
Southwest, as well as Hawaii. Meth abuse and the crimes associated with
it are spreading in areas such as Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis,
and Texas, as well as the East Coast and mid-Atlantic regions. This
problem, once perceived as a ``western state'' problem, has become a
nationwide problem, growing at an extraordinary rate.
My State has shown that a cooperative effort--law enforcement working
side-by-side with those handling cleanup, intervention, treatment,
child and family support, drug courts and family drug courts, and
education--is effective at addressing this problem. Thanks to the
Washington Methamphetamine Initiative and the ``Methamphetamine Action
Teams,'' multi-disciplinary teams situated in each county across the
State, meth production was cut back by 25 percent last year. Washington
State has dropped from second in the Nation to sixth in the production
of meth. The comprehensive, holistic approach my State has taken to
combat meth is working well, and I believe that our program can be a
model for the national fight.
By making intervention, treatment and family support as important as
arrests and prosecution, we are effectively overcoming the secondary
problems that meth creates by addressing the root causes, not just the
social symptoms. By taking this approach we are not simply growing
prison populations and pushing the problem to regions not previously
impacted by meth, but attacking the growth of the use of this terrible
drug.
We in Washington State have also learned that laws restricting the
sale of large quantities of precursor drugs such as ephedrine make it
more difficult for users to produce meth, and this tactic has reduced
the number of clandestine labs in the State.
This approach to fighting meth use has been very successful, but it
takes money. And although there has been an explosion in the use of
meth, Federal funding has been cut. Each year, States with a growing
meth problem are required to go through a politicized process seeking
Federal funding through the earmark process. And each year, the funds
are being cut.
These challenges to our States mean only one thing: we need to make
funding to combat meth permanent. Permanent Federal funding support for
meth enforcement and clean-up is critical to the efforts of State and
local law enforcement to reduce the use, manufacture and sale of meth.
That is why I am introducing the Confronting Methamphetamines Act of
2004. This bill will create a supplemental grant to augment the
Department of Justice's Byrne Formula Grant Program to provide block
grants to help States confront their meth problems.
Under my bill, States will be able to apply for a formula grant if
they meet two prerequisites: the State must have a comprehensive, long
term plan to address methamphetamine use, manufacture and sale; and the
State legislature must commit to enacting laws to limit the sales of
precursor products (the commercially available products used to make
meth, such as ephedrine). Where a State has met these two requirements,
that State will be eligible to receive a Federal formula grant.
States have discretion as to how to use the funds. The activities
funded may include arrest, lab seizures and clean up, child and family
support services, community based education, awareness and prevention,
intervention, treatment, Drug Court and Family Drug Court, community
policing, the hiring of specially trained law enforcement, State and
local health and environmental department support, and prosecution.
The Confronting Methamphetamines Act also provides for planning
grants, $100,000 per State, so States can develop long-term strategies
to address meth. We have seen in Washington and in other States that
comprehensive plans to address all aspects of meth--from use to
manufacture to sale--have the best and most efficient results. Through
this provision, I want to encourage States to consider the long-term
situation when they take the initial steps in combating meth.
To assure that the best practices to confront meth deployed in our
local communities are shared across the country, my bill requires the
U.S. Attorney General to collect data, to establish a national
clearinghouse for best practices in addressing the meth problem, and to
provide technical assistance to States or local agencies.
Like the Byrne Formula Grants, distribution to eligible States will
be based on State population. The supplemental allocation to an
eligible State will be no less than the base amount of $250,000 or 0.25
percent of the amount available for the program, whichever is greater,
with the remaining funds allocated to the other eligible States on the
basis of the state's relative share of total U.S. population.
The bill authorizes $100 million per fiscal year 2005 and 2006,
elevating the funding to $200 million for the subsequent three years,
assuring that the funds are available as the meth problem grows and
more States become plagued by the problem of meth.
I have received letters supporting this legislation from the
Fraternal Order of Police, National Association of Drug Court
Professionals, the Police Executive Research Forum, the Washington
State's Governor's office, representing State law enforcement,
environmental protection, health and human services and the Washington
State Methamphetamine Initiative, and the Pierce County Alliance,
essentially the epicenter of Washington State's response to
methamphetamines. These letters reflect the level and breadth of
concern for our law enforcement, drug addiction care providers, the
courts and environmental protection agencies.
We have to give a strong signal to the State and local governments
that we recognize the meth problems that they are facing, we are
committed to support long-term comprehensive strategies to confront the
problem, and will assure availability of substantial federal funds to
help confront this startlingly rapidly growing problem.
This legislation assures the funding and continuity of Federal
support desperately needed by our State and local governments. It
assures that States have the opportunity to develop a long-term
comprehensive strategy to combat meth, and gives those on the front
lines in this battle the flexibility to use the federal dollars as they
see fit, consistent with their long-term plan. I urge the Senate to
support this bill and plan to work aggressively with the other body to
bring it into law as promptly as possible.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the four letters of
support be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the additional material was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
National Association of Drug
Court Professionals,
Alexandria, VA, October 6, 2004.
Re Confronting Meth Act of 2004.
Hon. Maria Cantwell,
U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Cantwell: I am writing this letter in support
of the Confronting
[[Page S10733]]
Meth Act of 2004 on behalf of the entire drug court field and
the professionals and clients we serve. As active workers in
the areas of treatment, law enforcement and the judiciary, we
see the devastation of methamphetamine use. We understand the
debilitating effect meth has on its users and the
overwhelming impact it has on families and communities. Our
members contact us weekly and describe in detail the special
challenges that accompany addiction to meth and the
additional resources needed to meet these challenges. It is
important that communities all over the country have an
avenue to address this issue. The Act has the unique ability
to equip states with that ability.
The funding formula that is proposed will encourage local
solutions to a problem that differs from jurisdiction to
jurisdiction. The Act also lends itself to a multi-faceted
approach to a pervasive challenge. We wholly support this
legislation and pledge the expertise of our organization to
its passage and implementation. Thank you for your vision in
introducing this important legislation.
Sincerely,
Judge Karen Freeman-Wilson (ret.),
Chief Executive Officer.
____
Grand Lodge
Fraternal Order of Police,
Washington, DC, October 6, 2004.
Hon. Maria Cantwell,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Cantwell: I am writing on behalf of the
membership of the Fraternal Order of Police to advise you of
our support for legislation you intend to introduce entitled
the ``Confronting Methamphetamine Act.''
The bill creates a supplemental grant program at the U.S.
Department of Justice for States that develop a
comprehensive, long-term plan to address the use,
manufacture, and sale of methamphetamines, and has enacted or
will enact a law to limit the sale of precursor products that
are used to make this dangerous drug. States that meet this
criteria will be able to apply for funds to fight the growing
problem of methamphetamines and will have discretion as to
how to use the funds, be it for community policing, lab
seizures and clean up, awareness and prevention,
intervention, treatment, and prosecution. The bill authorizes
$100 million for the program in fiscal years 2005 and 2006,
and then elevates the funding to $200 million for the
subsequent three years.
Law enforcement needs additional resources to fight the
spread of methamphetamine abuse, and the bill you intend to
introduce will do just that. The F.O.P. welcomes the
opportunity to work with you and your staff on this
legislation. If we can be of any further assistance, please
do not hesitate to contact me or Executive Director Jim Pasco
through my Washington office.
Sincerely,
Chuck Canterbury,
National President.
____
Police Executive
Research Forum,
October 7, 2004.
Hon. Maria Cantwell,
Hart Senate Office Building,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Cantwell: On behalf of the Police Executive
Research Forum (PERF), a national organization of police
executive professionals who collectively serve more than 50
percent of the nation's population, I would like to thank you
for your continued leadership on law enforcement and public
issues. The men and women of law enforcement face tremendous
challenges in combating the manufacturing, trafficking, sale,
and use of illicit drugs, as well as drug-related violence
and crime in our streets, PERF commends your efforts to
introduce effective legislation to help provide law
enforcement with the resources to reduce the presence of
methamphetamine drugs and laboratories across the nation, and
to investigate and prosecute the criminals who corrupt our
children and endanger our communities.
The Confronting Methamphetamine Act of 2004 presents a
comprehensive, cooperative, multi-agency approach to
addressing the methamphetamine problem in the United States,
and PERF believes this to be the best course of action for
achieving long-term solutions. It is crucial to involve
federal, state, local, and private entities in this fight,
and to supplement that fight with grants that will enable law
enforcement, prosecutors, treatment facilities, and
community-based organizations to carry out their respective
missions effectively.
PERF members see first-hand the ravaging effect that
methamphetamine and other illicit drugs have on communities
nationwide. They recognize and applaud your efforts to
provide them with the resources to attack this problem head-
on. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to
contact PERF Legislative Director Martha Plotkin at
[email protected] or PERF Legislative Assistant Steve
Loyka at [email protected]. I look forward to working
with you and your staff on this legislation.
Sincerely,
Chuck Wexler,
Executive Director.
____
State of Washington,
Governor's Executive Policy Office,
Olympia, WA, October 5, 2004.
Senator Maria Cantwell,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Cantwell: On behalf of members of the
Governor's Methamphetamine Coordinating Committee, I am
writing to thank you for your continued support of
Washington's comprehensive strategy to reduce methamphetamine
trafficking and use. You have been a champion for funding
over five years, and I appreciate your willingness to
introduce legislation establishing an ongoing federal grant
program for this purpose.
Your proposed ``Confronting Methamphetamines Act'' would
help states like Washington implement effective strategies
including prevention, law enforcement, treatment, services to
affected children and families, and cleanup. It would
recognize the need for multi-disciplinary coalitions, local
and tribal involvement, and state laws restricting the sale
of precursor chemicals. It would provide planning grants to
help states develop strategies, as well as larger grants for
implementation.
I appreciate the chance to work with your staff in
developing this legislation. It deserves broad support among
members of Congress from the many states where the
methamphetamine epidemic has spread. Our Methamphetamine
Coordinating Committee members look forward to working with
your office as the bill is considered. Thank you again for
your leadership and support.
Sincerely,
Richard D. Van Wagenen,
Executive Policy Advisor.
____
Pierce County Alliance,
Tacoma, WA, June 17, 2004.
Senator Maria Cantwell,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Cantwell: On behalf of the Pierce County
Alliance and the Washington State Methamphetamine Initiative,
I want to express my sincere appreciation for your
outstanding support and efforts to bring about the essential
funding that makes our efforts possible. Your work has been
crucial to the continuance of the battle to abate the
methamphetamine crisis in our state.
Of course, I also fully endorse and support your
sponsorship of the ``Confronting Methamphetamines Act of
2004'' that would further assist states like ours to deal
with the multi-faceted problems of methamphetamine
production, distribution, and use. I am pleased to note that
it builds on the model that we have evolved here in
Washington State, encompassing a multi-disciplinary approach
with broad collaborations at all governmental levels and
across all social sectors. Please do not hesitate to contact
me if I can be of any assistance in this endeavor.
Again, my thanks to you for your continued leadership and
support on this critical issue.
Sincerely,
Terree Schmidt-Whelan,
Executive Director.
______
By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
S. 2935. A bill to amend section 35 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 to improve the health coverage tax credit, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. On Monday, the Government Accountability Office
(GAO) released a report on the Trade Adjustment Assistance health
coverage tax credit, HCTC. The report confirms what many in Congress
have been saying since the HCTC program began--the credit is not
enough, the program has several barriers to enrollment, the premiums
are prohibitively high for some workers because of medical
underwriting, and the program is very expensive to administer.
It is long past time for Congress to focus on the problems with the
TAA health coverage tax credit. That is why I am introducing
legislation today that will make much-needed improvements to the HCTC
program. The TAA Health Coverage Improvement Act of 2004 offers
solutions to many of the problems with the HCTC identified by GAO. This
legislation will go a long way to make the TAA health care tax credit a
realistic option for displaced workers and their families.
When Congress passed the Trade Act of 2002, we made a promise to
American workers that the potential loss of jobs will not equal the
loss of health care coverage. Unfortunately, Congress has failed to
make good on that promise. For the last two years, I have heard from
steel retirees and widows in my State about how unaffordable the TAA
health care tax credit is. And I have been very frustrated, just as I
was when this bill passed, that we were not able to make the credit
more affordable and accessible for people who need it the most--laid-
off workers and retirees who have very limited income.
[[Page S10734]]
For a good number of supporters of the Trade Act of 2002, the health
insurance tax credit was the single most important factor in overcoming
their concerns about giving the President fast- track authority to move
trade agreements through Congress. In my own judgment, the fast-track
would not have passed Congress without the health care tax credit. The
TAA health credit was the trade-off to balance the President's
authority.
Yet, the success many of us envisioned for the health care tax credit
has not been realized through implementation. The number of people who
have been able to access the health care tax credit over the last two
years is extremely disappointing. As of July 2004, only 13,194 out of
229,044 who are eligible for the credit are enrolled in the program.
That is less than six percent, which means that over 94 percent of
those eligible are not participating.
I must say to my colleagues that Congress has had a hand in these
disappointing enrollment figures. We have ignored every opportunity to
improve the health coverage tax credit and enhance the lives of workers
displaced by trade. Most recently, the members of this body voted
against the Wyden-Coleman-Rockefeller-Baucus TAA amendment to the FSC/
ETI bill. Not only would this amendment have extended Trade Adjustment
Assistance to service workers, it also would have addressed some of the
problems GAO has identified with the health coverage credit.
The TAA Health Coverage Improvement Act makes long overdue
improvements to the TAA health care tax credit. First, this legislation
addresses the issue of affordability. In addition to GAO, several
consumer advocacy groups and research organizations--including the
Commonwealth Fund, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, and
Families USA--have cited affordability of the credit as the primary
reason for low participation in the HCTC program. The bottom line is
that a 65 percent subsidy is not enough. With a 65 percent credit, an
eligible individual still has to pay an average of $1,714 out-of-pocket
per year for single coverage. This figure is particularly astounding
given the fact that the average worker, while actively employed and
earning a paycheck, paid just $508 in 2003 for single employer-
sponsored health insurance coverage. The TAA Health Coverage
Improvement Act makes the credit more affordable by increasing the
subsidy amount to 95 percent.
This legislation also addresses the issue of affordability by placing
limits on the use of the individual market, as Congress intended under
the original law. The Trade Act of 2002 specified that the health
insurance credit could not be used for the purchase of health insurance
coverage in the individual market except for HCTC-eligible workers who
previously had a private, non- group coverage policy 30 days prior to
separation from employment. However, States have been allowed by this
Administration to create state-based coverage options in the individual
market for any HCTC beneficiaries, including those who did not have
individual market coverage one month prior to separation from
employment.
Because of the Administration's interpretation of the law, there are
people who had employer-based coverage prior to separation from
employment who are now being covered in the individual market. This was
not the intent of the law. To make matters worse, this interpretation
undermines the consumer protections set forth in the law because
individual market plans are allowed to vary premiums based on age and
medical status. In one State GAO reviewed for its report, because of
medical underwriting, HCTC recipients in less-than-perfect health were
charged almost six times the premiums charged to recipients rated in
the healthiest category. The legislation I am introducing today
addresses this problem by clarifying that states can only designate
individual market coverage within guidelines of 30-day restriction and
by requiring individual market plans to be community-rated.
Second, this legislation guarantees that eligible workers will have
access to comprehensive group health coverage. Group coverage is what
people know. The vast majority of laid-off workers and PBGC retirees
had employer-sponsored group coverage prior to losing their jobs or
pension benefits. The TAA Health Coverage Improvement Act designates
the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan (FEHBP) as a qualified group
option in every State, so that displaced workers nationwide will have
access to the same type of affordable, comprehensive coverage they were
used to when they were employed.
Third, the TAA Health Coverage Act clarifies the three month
continuous coverage requirement. Under the original TAA statute,
displaced workers are required to maintain three months of continuous
health insurance coverage in order to qualify for certain consumer
protections. Those protections are guaranteed issue, no preexisting
condition exclusion, comparable premiums, and comparable benefits.
Congress intended this 3 month period to be counted as the 3 months
prior to separation from employment. However, the Administration has
interpreted the 3 month requirement as 3 months of health insurance
coverage prior to enrollment in the new health plan, which usually is
after separation from employment and after certification of TAA
eligibility. Many laid-off workers and PBGC recipients cannot afford to
maintain health coverage in the months between losing their jobs and
TAA certification and, therefore, lose eligibility for the statutorily
provided consumer protections. This legislation corrects this problem
by clarifying that 3 months of continuous coverage means 3 months prior
to separation from employment.
Fourth, this bill allows spouses and dependents to receive the health
coverage tax credit. Over the last 2 years, younger spouses and
dependents of Medicare-eligible individuals have not been able to
receive the subsidy because eligibility runs through the worker or
retiree. This technicality is unfair to individuals who rely on health
coverage through their spouses or parents. The TAA Health Coverage
Improvement Act allows younger spouses and dependent children to retain
eligibility for the health coverage tax credit in the event the
qualified beneficiary becomes eligible for Medicare.
Finally, this legislation streamlines the HCTC enrollment process and
makes it easier for trade-displaced workers to access health insurance
coverage. According to GAO, two of the factors contributing to low
participation include a complicated and fragmented enrollment process
and the inability of workers to pay 100 percent of the premium during
the 3 to 6 months they are waiting to enroll in advance payment. This
legislation includes a presumptive eligibility provision that allows
displaced workers to enroll in a qualified health plan and receive the
HCTC immediately upon application to the Department of Labor for
certification. There is also a provision which directs the Treasury
Secretary to pay 100 percent of the cost of premiums directly to the
health plans during the months TAA-eligible workers are waiting for
advance payment to begin.
As a former Governor, I know how important Trade Adjustment
Assistance is to individuals who have lost their jobs due to trade. In
West Virginia, thousands of workers have lost their jobs as a result of
trade policy. While adjusting to the loss of employment, these
individuals still have to pay mortgages, put food on the table, and
care for their families. Finding affordable health care adds a
significant burden to their worries. The TAA health coverage tax credit
is designed to help American workers retain health insurance coverage
during this very difficult transition.
Unfortunately, the HCTC program is not living up to its potential.
The Government Accountability Office has given us a very specific
diagnosis of the problems. Now, it is up to us to fix them. The TAA
Health Coverage Improvement Act builds upon the Trade Act of 2002 and
the lessons we have learned since in order to make the health coverage
credit workable for eligible individuals and their families. I look
forward to working with my colleagues to pass this important
legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
[[Page S10735]]
S. 2935
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``TAA Health
Coverage Improvement Act of 2004''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Improvement of the affordability of the credit.
Sec. 3. 100 percent credit and payment for monthly premiums paid prior
to certification of eligibility for the credit.
Sec. 4. Eligibility for certain pension plan participants; presumptive
eligibility.
Sec. 5. Clarification of 3-month creditable coverage requirement.
Sec. 6. TAA pre-certification period rule for purposes of determining
whether there is a 63-day lapse in creditable coverage.
Sec. 7. Continued qualification of family members after certain events.
Sec. 8. Offering of Federal group coverage.
Sec. 9. Additional requirements for individual health insurance costs.
Sec. 10. Alignment of COBRA coverage with TAA period for TAA-eligible
individuals.
Sec. 11. Notice requirements.
Sec. 12. Annual report on enhanced TAA benefits.
Sec. 13. Extension of national emergency grants.
Sec. 14. Extension of funding for operation of State high risk health
insurance pools.
SEC. 2. IMPROVEMENT OF THE AFFORDABILITY OF THE CREDIT.
(a) Improvement of Affordability.--
(1) In General.--Section 35(a) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (relating to credit for health insurance costs of
eligible individuals) is amended by striking ``65'' and
inserting ``95''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--Section 7527(b) of such Code
(relating to advance payment of credit for health insurance
costs of eligible individuals) is amended by striking ``65''
and inserting ``95''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2004.
SEC. 3. 100 PERCENT CREDIT AND PAYMENT FOR MONTHLY PREMIUMS
PAID PRIOR TO CERTIFICATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR
THE CREDIT.
(a) In General.--Subsection (a) of section 35 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by section 2(a)(1),
is amended--
(1) by striking the subsection heading and all that follows
through ``In case'' and inserting ``Amount of Credit.--
``(1) In general.--In case''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) 100 percent credit for months prior to issuance of
eligibility certificate.--The amount allowed as a credit
against the tax imposed by subtitle A shall be equal to 100
percent in the case of the taxpayer's first eligible coverage
months occurring prior to the issuance of a qualified health
insurance costs credit eligibility certificate.''.
(b) Payment for Premiums Due Prior to Certification of
Eligibility for the Credit.--Section 7527 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to advance payment of credit
for health insurance costs of eligible individuals) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) Payment for Premiums Due Prior To Issuance of
Certificate.--The program established under subsection (a)
shall provide--
``(1) that the Secretary shall make payments on behalf of a
certified individual of an amount equal to 100 percent of the
premiums for coverage of the taxpayer and qualifying family
members under qualified health insurance for eligible
coverage months (as defined in section 35(b)) occurring prior
to the issuance of a qualified health insurance costs credit
eligibility certificate; and
``(2) that any payments made under paragraph (1) shall not
be included in the gross income of the taxpayer on whose
behalf such payments were made.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to months beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act in taxable years ending after such
date.
SEC. 4. ELIGIBILITY FOR CERTAIN PENSION PLAN RECIPIENTS;
PRESUMPTIVE ELIGIBILITY.
(a) Eligibility for Certain Pension Plan Recipients.--
Subsection (c) of section 35 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and
inserting ``, and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) an eligible multiemployer pension participant.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(5) Eligible multiemployer pension recipient.--The term
`eligible multiemployer pension recipient' means, with
respect to any month, any individual--
``(A) who has attained age 55 as of the first day of such
month,
``(B) who is receiving a benefit from a multiemployer plan
(as defined in section 3(37)(A) of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974), and
``(C) whose former employer has withdrawn from such
multiemployer plan pursuant to section 4203(a) of such
Act.''.
(b) Presumptive Eligibility for Petitioners for Trade
Adjustment Assistance.--Subsection (c) of section 35 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by subsection (a),
is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(6) Presumptive status as a taa recipient.--The term
`eligible individual' shall include any individual who is
covered by a petition filed with the Secretary of Labor under
section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974. This paragraph shall
apply to any individual only with respect to months which--
``(A) end after the date that such petition is so filed,
and
``(B) begin before the earlier of--
``(i) the 90th day after the date of filing of such
petition, or
``(ii) the date on which the Secretary of Labor makes a
final determination with respect to such petition.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (1) of section 7527(d) of such Code is
amended by striking ``or an eligible alternative TAA
recipient (as defined in section 35(c)(3))'' and inserting
``, an eligible alternative TAA recipient (as defined in
section 35(c)(3)), an eligible multiemployer pension
recipient (as defined in section 35(c)(5), or an individual
who is an eligible individual by reason of section
35(c)(6)''.
(2) Section 173(f)(4) of the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(f)(4)) is amended--
(A) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in subparagraph (C), by striking the period and
inserting a comma; and
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (C), the following new
subparagraphs:
``(D) an eligible multiemployer pension recipient (as
defined in section 35(c)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986), and
``(E) an individual who is an eligible individual by reason
of section 35(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.''.
(d) Technical Amendment Clarifying Eligibility of Certain
Displaced Workers Receiving a Benefit Under a Defined Benefit
Pension Plan.--The first sentence of section 35(c)(2) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting before
the period the following: ``, and shall include any such
individual who would be eligible to receive such an allowance
but for the fact that the individual is receiving a benefit
under a defined benefit plan (as defined in section 3(35) of
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974).''.
(e) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to months beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act in taxable years ending after such
date.
SEC. 5. CLARIFICATION OF 3-MONTH CREDITABLE COVERAGE
REQUIREMENT.
(a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 35(e)(2)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualifying
individual) is amended by inserting ``(prior to the
employment separation necessary to attain the status of an
eligible individual)'' after ``9801(c)''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 173(f)(2)(B)(ii)(I) of
the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C.
2918(f)(2)(B)(ii)(I)) is amended by inserting ``(prior to the
employment separation necessary to attain the status of an
eligible individual)'' after ``1986''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to months beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act in taxable years ending after such
date.
SEC. 6. TAA PRE-CERTIFICATION PERIOD RULE FOR PURPOSES OF
DETERMINING WHETHER THERE IS A 63-DAY LAPSE IN
CREDITABLE COVERAGE.
(a) ERISA Amendment.--Section 701(c)(2) of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1181(c)(2))
is amended by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(C) TAA-eligible individuals.--
``(i) TAA pre-certification period rule.--In the case of a
TAA-eligible individual, the period beginning on the date the
individual has a TAA-related loss of coverage and ending on
the date that is 5 days after the postmark date of the notice
by the Secretary (or by any person or entity designated by
the Secretary) that the individual is eligible for a
qualified health insurance costs credit eligibility
certificate for purposes of section 7527 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 shall not be taken into account in
determining the continuous period under subparagraph (A).
``(ii) Definitions.--The terms `TAA-eligible individual',
and `TAA-related loss of coverage' have the meanings given
such terms in section 605(b)(4)(C).''.
(b) PHSA Amendment.--Section 2701(c)(2) of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg(c)(2)) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) TAA-eligible individuals.--
``(i) TAA pre-certification period rule.--In the case of a
TAA-eligible individual, the period beginning on the date the
individual has a TAA-related loss of coverage and ending on
the date that is 5 days after the postmark date of the notice
by the Secretary (or by any person or entity designated by
the Secretary) that the individual is eligible for a
qualified health insurance costs credit eligibility
certificate for purposes of section
[[Page S10736]]
7527 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall not be taken
into account in determining the continuous period under
subparagraph (A).
``(ii) Definitions.--The terms `TAA-eligible individual',
and `TAA-related loss of coverage' have the meanings given
such terms in section 2205(b)(4)(C).''.
(c) IRC Amendment.--Section 9801(c)(2) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to not counting periods before
significant breaks in creditable coverage) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) TAA-eligible individuals.--
``(i) TAA pre-certification period rule.--In the case of a
TAA-eligible individual, the period beginning on the date the
individual has a TAA-related loss of coverage and ending on
the date which is 5 days after the postmark date of the
notice by the Secretary (or by any person or entity
designated by the Secretary) that the individual is eligible
for a qualified health insurance costs credit eligibility
certificate for purposes of section 7527 shall not be taken
into account in determining the continuous period under
subparagraph (A).
``(ii) Definitions.--The terms `TAA-eligible individual',
and `TAA-related loss of coverage' have the meanings given
such terms in section 4980B(f)(5)(C)(iv).''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to months beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act in taxable years ending after such
date.
SEC. 7. CONTINUED QUALIFICATION OF FAMILY MEMBERS AFTER
CERTAIN EVENTS.
(a) In General.--Subsection (g) of section 35 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating
paragraph (9) as paragraph (10) and inserting after paragraph
(8) the following new paragraph:
``(9) Continued qualification of family members after
certain events.--
``(A) Eligible individual becomes medicare eligible.--In
the case of a month which would be an eligible coverage month
with respect to an eligible individual but for subsection
(f)(2)(A), such month shall be treated as an eligible
coverage month with respect to any qualifying family member
of such eligible individual (but not with respect to such
eligible individual).
``(B) Divorce.--In the case of a month which would be an
eligible coverage month with respect to a former spouse of a
taxpayer but for the finalization of a divorce between the
spouse and the taxpayer that occurs during the period in
which the taxpayer is an eligible individual, such month
shall be treated as an eligible coverage month with respect
to such former spouse.
``(C) Death.--In the case of a month which would be an
eligible coverage month with respect to an eligible
individual but for the death of such individual, such month
shall be treated as an eligible coverage month with respect
to any qualifying family of such eligible individual.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 173(f) of the Workforce
Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(f)) is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(8) Continued qualification of family members after
certain events.--
``(A) Eligible individual becomes medicare eligible.--In
the case of a month which would be an eligible coverage month
with respect to an eligible individual but for subsection
(f)(2)(A), such month shall be treated as an eligible
coverage month with respect to any qualifying family member
of such eligible individual (but not with respect to such
eligible individual).
``(B) Divorce.--In the case of a month which would be an
eligible coverage month with respect to a former spouse of a
taxpayer but for the finalization of a divorce between the
spouse and the taxpayer that occurs during the period in
which the taxpayer is an eligible individual, such month
shall be treated as an eligible coverage month with respect
to such former spouse.
``(C) Death.--In the case of a month which would be an
eligible coverage month with respect to an eligible
individual but for the death of such individual, such month
shall be treated as an eligible coverage month with respect
to any qualifying family of such eligible individual.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to months beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act in taxable years ending after such
date.
SEC. 8. OFFERING OF FEDERAL GROUP COVERAGE.
(a) Provision of Group Coverage.--
(1) In general.--The Director of the Office of Personnel
Management jointly with the Secretary of the Treasury shall
establish a program under which eligible individuals (as
defined in section 35(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986) are offered enrollment under health benefit plans that
are made available under FEHBP.
(2) Terms and conditions.--The terms and conditions of
health benefits plans offered under paragraph (1) shall be
the same as the terms and coverage offered under FEHBP,
except that the percentage of the premium charged to eligible
individuals (as so defined) for such health benefit plans
shall be equal to 5 percent.
(3) Study.--The Director of the Office of Personnel
Management jointly with the Secretary of the Treasury shall
conduct a study of the impact of the offering of health
benefit plans under this subsection on the terms and
conditions, including premiums, for health benefit plans
offered under FEHBP and shall submit to Congress, not later
than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, a
report on such study. Such report may contain such
recommendations regarding the establishment of separate risk
pools for individuals covered under FEHBP and eligible
individuals covered under health benefit plans offered under
paragraph (1) as may be appropriate to protect the interests
of individuals covered under FEHBP and alleviate any adverse
impact on FEHBP that may result from the offering of such
health benefit plans.
(4) FEHBP defined.--In this section, the term ``FEHBP''
means the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program offered
under chapter 89 of title 5, United States Code.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Paragraph (1) of section 35(e) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following
new subparagraph:
``(K) Coverage under a health benefits plan offered under
section 8(a)(1) of the TAA Health Care Tax Credit Improvement
Act of 2004.''.
(2) Section 173(f)(2)(A) of the Workforce Investment Act of
1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(f)(2)(A)) is amended by adding at the
end the following new clause:
``(xi) Coverage under a health benefits plan offered under
section 8(a)(1) of the TAA Health Care Tax Credit Improvement
Act of 2004.''.
SEC. 9. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR INDIVIDUAL HEALTH
INSURANCE COSTS.
(a) In general.--Subparagraph (A) of section 35(e)(2) of
such Code is amended by striking ``subparagraphs (B) through
(H) of paragraph (1)'' and inserting ``paragraph (1) (other
than subparagraphs (A), (I), and (K) thereof)''.
(b) Rating System Requirement.--Subparagraph (J) of section
35(e)(1) of such Code is amended by adding at the end the
following: ``For purposes of this subparagraph and clauses
(ii), (iii), and (iv) of subparagraph (F), such term does not
include any insurance unless the premiums for such insurance
are restricted based on a community rating system (determined
other than on the basis of age).''.
(c) Clarification of Congressional Intent To Limit Use of
Individual Health Insurance Coverage Option.--Section
35(e)(1)(J) (relating to qualified health insurance) is
amended in the matter preceding clause (i), by inserting ``,
but only'' after ``under individual health insurance''.
(d) Conforming Amendments.--Section 173(f)(2) of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(f)(2)) is
amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A)(x), by adding at the end the
following: ``Such term does not include any insurance unless
the premiums for such insurance are restricted based on a
community rating system (determined other than on the basis
of age).''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B)--
(A) in the matter preceding subclause (I), by inserting ``,
but only'' after ``under individual health insurance''; and
(B) in clause (i), by striking ``clauses (ii) through
(viii) of subparagraph (A)'' and inserting ``subparagraph (A)
(other than clauses (i), (x), and (xi) thereof)''.
SEC. 10. ALIGNMENT OF COBRA COVERAGE WITH TAA PERIOD FOR TAA-
ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS.
(a) ERISA.--Section 605(b) of the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1165(b)) is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``and
Coverage'' after ``Election''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in the paragraph heading, by inserting ``and period''
after ``Commencement'';
(B) by striking ``and shall'' and inserting ``, shall'';
and
(C) by inserting ``, and in no event shall the maximum
period required under section 602(2)(A) be less than the
period during which the individual is a TAA-eligible
individual'' before the period at the end.
(b) Internal Revenue Code of 1986.--Section 4980B(f)(5)(C)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
(1) in the subparagraph heading, by inserting ``and
coverage'' after ``election''; and
(2) in clause (ii)--
(A) in the clause heading, by inserting ``and period''
after ``Commencement'';
(B) by striking ``and shall'' and inserting ``, shall'';
and
(C) by inserting ``, and in no event shall the maximum
period required under paragraph (2)(B)(i) be less than the
period during which the individual is a TAA-eligible
individual'' before the period at the end.
(c) Public Health Service Act.--Section 2205(b) of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300bb-5(b)) is amended--
(1) in the subsection heading, by inserting ``and
Coverage'' after ``Election''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)--
(A) in the paragraph heading, by inserting ``and period''
after ``Commencement'';
(B) by striking ``and shall'' and inserting ``, shall'';
and
(C) by inserting ``, and in no event shall the maximum
period required under section 2202(2)(A) be less than the
period during which the individual is a TAA-eligible
individual'' before the period at the end.
SEC. 11. NOTICE REQUIREMENTS.
Section 7527 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating
to advance payment of credit for health insurance costs of
eligible individuals), as amended by section 3(b), is
[[Page S10737]]
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(f) Inclusion of Certain Information.--The notice by the
Secretary (or by any person or entity designated by the
Secretary) that an individual is eligible for a qualified
health insurance costs credit eligibility certificate shall
include--
``(1) the name, address, and telephone number of the State
office or offices responsible for determining that the
individual is eligible for such certificate and for providing
the individual with assistance with enrollment in qualified
health insurance (as defined in section 35(e)),
``(2) a list of the coverage options that are treated as
qualified health insurance (as so defined) by the State in
which the individual resides, and
``(3) in the case of a TAA-eligible individual (as defined
in section 4980B(f)(5)(C)(iv)(II)), a statement informing the
individual that the individual has 63 days from the date that
is 5 days after the postmark date of such notice to enroll in
such insurance without a lapse in creditable coverage (as
defined in section 9801(c)).''.
SEC. 12. ANNUAL REPORT ON ENHANCED TAA BENEFITS.
Not later than October 1 of each year (beginning in 2004)
the Secretary of the Treasury, after consultation with the
Secretary of Labor, shall report to the Committee on Finance
and the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
of the Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means and the
Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives the following information with respect to the
most recent taxable year ending before such date:
(1) The total number of participants utilizing the health
insurance tax credit under section 35 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, including a measurement of such participants
identified--
(A) by State, and
(B) by coverage under COBRA continuation provisions (as
defined in section 9832(d)(1) of such Code) and by non-COBRA
coverage (further identified by group and individual market).
(2) The range of monthly health insurance premiums offered
and the average and median monthly health insurance premiums
offered to TAA-eligible individuals (as defined in section
4980B(f)(5)(C)(iv)(II) of such Code) under COBRA continuation
provisions (as defined in section 9832(d)(1) of such Code),
State-based continuation coverage provided under a State law
that requires such coverage, and each category of coverage
described in section 35(e)(1) of such Code, identified by
State and by the actuarial value of such coverage and the
specific benefits provided and cost-sharing imposed under
such coverage.
(3) The number of States applying for and receiving
national emergency grants under section 173(f) of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(f)) and the
time necessary for application approval of such grants.
(4) The cost of administering the health credit program
under section 35 of such Code, by function, including the
cost of subcontractors.
SEC. 13. EXTENSION OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY GRANTS.
(a) In General.--Section 173(f) of the Workforce Investment
Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(f)) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (1) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
``(1) Use of funds.--
``(A) Health insurance coverage for eligible individuals in
order to obtain qualified health insurance that has
guaranteed issue and other consumer protections.--Funds made
available to a State or entity under paragraph (4)(A) of
subsection (a) shall be used to provide an eligible
individual described in paragraph (4)(C) and such
individual's qualifying family members with health insurance
coverage for the 3-month period that immediately precedes the
first eligible coverage month (as defined in section 35(b) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986) in which such eligible
individual and such individual's qualifying family members
are covered by qualified health insurance that meets the
requirements described in clauses (i) through (iv) of section
35(e)(2)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (or such
longer minimum period as is necessary in order for such
eligible individual and such individual's qualifying family
members to be covered by qualified health insurance that
meets such requirements).
``(B) Additional uses.--Funds made available to a State or
entity under paragraph (4)(A) of subsection (a) may be used
by the State or entity for the following:
``(i) Health insurance coverage.--To assist an eligible
individual and such individual's qualifying family members
with enrolling in health insurance coverage and qualified
health insurance or paying premiums for such coverage or
insurance.
``(ii) Administrative expenses and start-up expenses to
establish group health plan coverage options for qualified
health insurance.--To pay the administrative expenses related
to the enrollment of eligible individuals and such
individuals' qualifying family members in health insurance
coverage and qualified health insurance, including--
``(I) eligibility verification activities;
``(II) the notification of eligible individuals of
available health insurance and qualified health insurance
options;
``(III) processing qualified health insurance costs credit
eligibility certificates provided for under section 7527 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986;
``(IV) providing assistance to eligible individuals in
enrolling in health insurance coverage and qualified health
insurance;
``(V) the development or installation of necessary data
management systems; and
``(VI) any other expenses determined appropriate by the
Secretary, including start-up costs and on going
administrative expenses, in order for the State to treat the
coverage described in subparagraph (C), (D), (E), or (F)(i)
of section 35(e)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or,
only if the coverage is under a group health plan, the
coverage described in subparagraph (F)(ii), (F)(iii),
(F)(iv), (G), or (H) of such section, as qualified health
insurance under that section.
``(iii) Outreach.--To pay for outreach to eligible
individuals to inform such individuals of available health
insurance and qualified health insurance options, including
outreach consisting of notice to eligible individuals of such
options made available after the date of enactment of this
clause and direct assistance to help potentially eligible
individuals and such individual's qualifying family members
qualify and remain eligible for the credit established under
section 35 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and advance
payment of such credit under section 7527 of such Code.
``(iv) Bridge funding.--To assist potentially eligible
individuals purchase qualified health insurance coverage
prior to issuance of a qualified health insurance costs
credit eligibility certificate under section 7527 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and commencement of advance
payment, and receipt of expedited payment, under subsections
(a) and (e), respectively, of that section.
``(C) Rule of construction.--The inclusion of a permitted
use under this paragraph shall not be construed as
prohibiting a similar use of funds permitted under subsection
(g).''; and
(2) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
``(2) Qualified health insurance.--For purposes of this
subsection and subsection (g), the term `qualified health
insurance' has the meaning given that term in section 35(e)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.''.
(b) Funding.--Section 174(c)(1) of the Workforce Investment
Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2919(c)(1)) is amended--
(1) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``Authorization
and appropriation for fiscal year 2002'' and inserting
``Appropriations''; and
(2) by striking subparagraph (A) and inserting the
following new subparagraph:
``(A) to carry out subsection (a)(4)(A) of section 173--
``(i) $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2002; and
``(ii) $300,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2005
through 2007; and''.
(c) Report Regarding Failure To Comply With Requirements
for Expedited Approval Procedures.--Section 173(f) of the
Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2918(f)) is
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(8) Report for failure to comply with requirements for
expedited approval procedures.--If the Secretary fails to
make the notification required under clause (i) of paragraph
(3)(A) within the 15-day period required under that clause,
or fails to provide the technical assistance required under
clause (ii) of such paragraph within a timely manner so that
a State or entity may submit an approved application within 2
months of the date on which the State or entity's previous
application was disapproved, the Secretary shall submit a
report to Congress explaining such failure.''.
(d) Technical Amendment.--Effective as if included in the
enactment of the Trade Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-210; 116
Stat. 933), subsection (f) of section 203 of that Act is
repealed.
SEC. 14. EXTENSION OF FUNDING FOR OPERATION OF STATE HIGH
RISK HEALTH INSURANCE POOLS.
(a) Extension of Seed Grants.--Section 2745 of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-45) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), in the subsection heading by
inserting ``Extension of'' before ``Seed''; and
(2) in subsection (c)(1), by striking ``$20,000,000'' and
all that follows through ``2003'' and inserting ``$15,000,000
for the period of fiscal years 2005 and 2006''.
(b) Funds for Operations.--Section 2745 of the Public
Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-45) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)--
(A) in the subsection heading by striking ``Matching''; and
(B) by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following
new paragraph:
``(2) Allotment.--The amounts appropriated under subsection
(c)(2) for a fiscal year shall be made available to the
States (or the entities that operate the high risk pool under
applicable State law) as follows:
``(A) An amount equal to 50 percent of the appropriated
amount for the fiscal year shall be allocated in equal
amounts among each eligible State that applies for assistance
under this subsection.
``(B) An amount equal to 25 percent of the appropriated
amount for the fiscal year shall be allocated among the
States so that the amount provided to a State bears the same
ratio to such available amount as the number of uninsured
individuals in the State
[[Page S10738]]
bears to the total number of uninsured individuals in all
States (as determined by the Secretary).
``(C) An amount equal to 25 percent of the appropriated
amount for the fiscal year shall be allocated among the
States so that the amount provided to a State bears the same
ratio to such available amount as the number of individuals
enrolled in health care coverage through the qualified high
risk pool of the State bears to the total number of
individuals so enrolled through qualified high risk pools in
all States (as determined by the Secretary).''; and
(2) in subsection (c)(2), by striking ``$40,000,000'' and
all that follows through the period and inserting
``$75,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009 to
make allotments under subsection (b)(2).''.
(c) Definitions.--Section 2745 of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg-45) is amended--
(1) in subsection (d), by inserting after ``2744(c)(2)''
the following: ``, except that with respect to subparagraph
(A) of such section a State may elect to provide for the
enrollment of eligible individuals through an acceptable
alternative mechanism,''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(e) Standard Risk Rate.--In subsection (b)(1)(A), the
term `standard risk rate' means a rate--
``(1) determined under the State high risk pool by
considering the premium rates charged by other health
insurers offering health insurance coverage to individuals in
the insurance market served;
``(2) that is established using reasonable actuarial
techniques; and
``(3) that reflects anticipated claims experience and
expenses for the coverage involved.''.
______
By Mr. CAMPBELL:
S. 2936. A bill to restore land to the Enterprise Rancheria to
rectify an inequitable taking of the land; to the Committee on Indian
Affairs.
Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the
Enterprise Rancheria Land Restoration Act of 2004, a bill that would
restore lands to the Enterprise Rancheria, a Federally recognized
Indian tribe. The tribe seeks this restoration to rectify an
inequitable taking of their lands for the Oroville Dam in 1964.
I am introducing this bill, at the request of the tribe, primarily to
initiate a discussion regarding the tribe's efforts to obtain an
equitable resolution among all the interested parties, including the
tribe, local communities, and the tribe's congressional delegation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2936
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 ``Enterprise Rancheria Land
Restoration Act of 2004''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) the Enterprise Rancheria is 1 of several Federally
recognized tribes of Maidu Indians in the State of California
that function under a government-to-government relationship
with the Federal Government;
(2) the Maidu people lived for thousands of years along the
watershed of the Feather River drainage area in north central
California, near what is now known as the Sacramento Valley
floor, and near the confluence of the south, middle, north,
and west branches of the Feather River;
(3) in 1916, pursuant to section 3 of the Act of August 1,
1914 (38 Stat. 589, chapter 222), and other Federal laws
relating to homeless Indians, a parcel of land comprising
approximately 40.64 acres was purchased for Enterprise
Rancheria;
(4) in 1915, the Secretary of the Interior developed a
census of approximately 51 Maidu Indians, which is now used
for the purpose of establishing the base membership roll for
the Enterprise Rancheria;
(5) Enterprise Rancheria has been continuously federally
recognized since 1915 and was again recognized by virtue of
voting in an election on June 12, 1935, pursuant to section
19 of the Act of June 18, 1934 (commonly known as the
``Indian Reorganization Act'') (48 Stat. 984, chapter 576);
(6) Enterprise Rancheria has a constitution recognized by
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, a functioning governing body,
and approximately 664 enrolled members;
(7) on August 20, 1964, Public Law 88-453 was enacted,
which authorized the Secretary of the Interior to sell
Enterprise Rancheria No. 2 parcel to the State of California
for the approximate sum of $12,196, for the sole purpose of
construction of Oroville Dam;
(8) the State of California requested the law described in
paragraph (7) because Enterprise Rancheria No. 2 parcel would
be within the reservoir area of the Oroville Dam, an
important element of the California water plan;
(9) as a result of Public Law 88-453, Enterprise Rancheria
No. 2 parcel is nearly all under water within the reservoir
of the Oroville Dam;
(10) pursuant to Public Law 88-453, $11,175 was paid as
consideration for the 40.46 acres of Enterprise Rancheria No.
2 parcel, along with $1,020 for appraised personal property,
for a total purchase price of $12,196.00;
(11) the payment was distributed to 4 individuals, Henry B.
Martin, Vera Martin Kiras, Stanley Martin, and Ralph G.
Martin, who received a pro rata share of the proceeds;
(12) the remaining heirs and members of the Tribe received
no compensation for the sale of the land;
(13) subsequent to the sale of the Enterprise Rancheria No.
2 parcel, the Enterprise Rancheria members, having lost their
homes, community, and traditional homeland, were forced to
scatter throughout the surrounding foothill communities and
the Sacramento Valley area, which has caused a continuing
decay of their culture, language, and traditions;
(14) recognizing that the final resolution of any equitable
compensation claims based on the inequitable taking of
Enterprise Rancheria No. 2 parcel will take many years and
entail great expense to all parties, rectifying the loss of
the Enterprise Rancheria is imperative at this time;
(15) the uncertainty as to the availability of Enterprise
Rancheria land taken in 1964 should be settled as soon as
practicable to avoid further damage to the long-term
economic, social, cultural planning, and development of the
Enterprise Rancheria;
(16) to advance and fulfill the goals of Federal Indian
policy and the responsibility of the United States to protect
the land base and members of Enterprise Rancheria, it is
appropriate that the United States participate in the
implementation of restoring the land in accordance with this
Act; and
(17) this Act settles all claims Enterprise Rancheria may
have regarding any equitable compensation based on the taking
of the original Enterprise Rancheria No. 2 parcel in 1964.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are--
(1) to rectify an inequitable taking of land owned by
Enterprise Rancheria, specifically that parcel known as
Enterprise Rancheria No. 2 parcel, which comprised
approximately 40.64 acres, in a manner that is consistent
with the trust responsibility of the United States toward
Federally recognized Indian tribes;
(2) to restore land to the Enterprise Rancheria and improve
the socioeconomic, cultural, and traditional aspects of the
Maidu people of the Enterprise Rancheria, through land that
can be used for economic development to improve the social,
cultural, governmental, educational, health, and general
welfare of Enterprise Rancheria and members of the Enterprise
Rancheria; and
(3) to require that land not to exceed 41 acres acquired by
Enterprise Rancheria within the 40-mile radius of Enterprise
Rancheria No. 2 parcel and within the Estom Yumeka Maidu
aboriginal boundaries, if approved for trust status pursuant
to part 151 of title 25, Code of Federal Regulations (or a
successor regulation), be treated for all legal purposes as
the restoration of land for an Indian tribe that is restored
to Federal recognition.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Aboriginal boundaries.--The term ``aboriginal
boundaries'' means the boundaries of the land occupied and
possessed by the Maidu people prior to conquest, as a defined
area of what is now California, designated as the land near
and around the confluence of the Feather River within the
Sacramento Valley.
(2) Acquired land.--The term ``acquired land'' means that
land purchased on or after the date of enactment of this Act
to restore land taken from the Enterprise Rancheria for the
State of California, pursuant to Public Law 88-453.
(3) Enterprise rancheria.--The term ``Enterprise
Rancheria'' means the Rancheria Tribe that was federally
recognized on April 20, 1915, with a governing constitution,
approved April 12, 1995.
(4) Enterprise rancheria no. 2 parcel.--The term
``Enterprise Rancheria No. 2 parcel'' means the original
40.64 acre land base parcel belonging to the Maidu Indians
that was established and purchased by the United States and
placed in trust status for the homeless Maidu people in the
area of the parcel.
(5) Feather river drainage area.--The term ``Feather River
drainage area'' means the area near and around the confluence
of the south, middle, north, and west branches of the Feather
River and drainage area below the confluence.
(6) Rancheria act.--The term ``Rancheria Act'' means Public
Law 85-671 (commonly known as the ``California Rancheria
Act''), which terminated 38 California Rancherias.
(7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
(8) Trust status.--The term ``trust status'' means the
status of land, the title of which is held by the United
States on behalf and for the beneficial use of recognized
Indian tribes in accordance with part 151 of title 25, Code
of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation).
[[Page S10739]]
SEC. 4. PLACEMENT OF ACQUIRED LAND IN TRUST STATUS.
The Secretary may place into trust status not to exceed 41
acres of land of the Enterprise Rancheria, if the land is
approved for trust status.
SEC. 5. REPLACEMENT LAND.
(a) Purchase.--To restore the Enterprise Rancheria No. 2
parcel, the Enterprise Rancheria may purchase not to exceed
41 acres of replacement land within the 40-mile radius of
Enterprise Rancheria No. 2 parcel and within the aboriginal
boundaries of the Estom Yumeka Maidu.
(b) Trust Status.--The Secretary may place the replacement
land into trust status, the title to which shall be held in
trust by the United States for the benefit of Enterprise
Rancheria, if all Federal requirements of placing the land
into trust status are satisfied.
(c) Treatment of Replacement Land.--The acquisition of land
under subsection (a) shall be treated as the restoration of
land for an Indian tribe that is recognized by the Federal
Government.
SEC. 6. EFFECT ON TRUST STATUS.
This Act does not limit the authority of the Secretary to
approve or deny any land application for trust status.
SEC. 7. FULL SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS.
On the placement of the land described in section 5 into
trust status, the Enterprise Rancheria shall be considered to
have relinquished all equitable compensation claims the
Enterprise Rancheria may have against the United States and
the State of California arising from the sale of Enterprise
Rancheria No. 2 parcel.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Reed):
S. 2937. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a
grant program to provide supportive services in permanent supportive
housing for chronically homeless individuals, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, today I rise with my colleague, Senator
Jack Reed, to introduce the Services for Ending Long-Term Homelessness
Act. I would like to thank Senator Reed for his support in introducing
this bill. I appreciate his dedication and commitment to this issue.
The chronically homeless are about 10 percent of the entire homeless
population, but consume a majority of the services. There are
approximately 200,000 to 250,000 people who experience chronic
homelessness. Those numbers include the heads of families, as well.
Tragically, for these individuals, the periods of homelessness are
measured in years--not weeks and months. They tend to have disabling
health and behavioral health problems: 40 percent have substance abuse
disorders, 25 percent have a physical disability, and 20 percent have
serious mental illness. These factors often contribute to a person
becoming homeless, in the first place, and are certainly an impediment
to overcoming it.
The President has set a goal of ending chronic homelessness in 10
years. The President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, chaired
by the Ohio Department of Mental Health Director, Mike Hogan,
recommended that a comprehensive program be created to facilitate
access to permanent supportive housing for individuals and families who
are chronically homeless. This recommendation is so important because
affordable housing, alone, is not enough for this hard to reach group.
And, temporary shelter-housing does not provide the stability and
services needed to provide long-term positive outcomes. Only supportive
housing, where the chronically homeless can receive shelter and
services, such as mental health and substance abuse treatment, has been
effective in decreasing their chances of returning to the streets and
increasing their chances for leading productive lives.
Not only is it right to help this group of hard to reach individuals,
but it is also fiscally responsible. This group is one of the most
expensive groups to serve. As I mentioned previously, they represent 10
percent of the overall homeless population, however they consume a
majority of the services for the homeless. They consume the most
emergency housing and health care services, which are also the most
costly to provide. By encouraging supportive housing, we are providing
the services necessary for these individuals and families to really get
back on their feet. We can either continue to provide expensive
emergency services to these needy people or we can give them the right
kind of help--the type of help they need for their long-term well-being
and long-term well-being of our communities.
Unfortunately, current programs for funding services in permanent
supportive housing, other than those administered by the Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD), were not designed to be
coordinated with housing programs. These programs were also not
designed to meet the challenging needs of this specific subgroup of the
homeless. That is why the bill we are introducing today would provide
the authorization to fund services to the chronically homeless in
supportive housing by providing grants which can be used with existing
programs through HUD and State and local communities.
This bill also would encourage those who provide services to the
chronically homeless, such as SAMHSA within the Department of Health
and Human Services, to work with and coordinate their efforts with
those who provide the physical housing, such as HUD. Under the current
administration, these two departments have started to truly coordinate
their efforts and this bill would encourage and support that continued
collaboration.
This is a good bill, and it could make a real difference in the lives
of so many individuals in need. I ask my colleagues to join us in
support.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2937
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 ``Services for Ending Long-
Term Homelessness Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Nationally, there are approximately 200,000 to 250,000
people who experience chronic homelessness, including some
families with children. Chronically homeless people often
live in shelters or on the streets for years at a time,
experience repeated episodes of homelessness without
achieving housing stability, or cycle between homelessness,
jails, mental health facilities, and hospitals.
(2) The President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health
recommended the development and implementation of a
comprehensive plan designed to facilitate access to 150,000
units of permanent supportive housing for consumers and
families who are chronically homeless. The Commission found
that affordable housing alone is insufficient for many people
with severe mental illness, and that flexible, mobile,
individualized support services are also necessary to support
and sustain consumers in their housing.
(3) Congress and the President have set a goal of ending
chronic homelessness in 10 years.
(4) Permanent supportive housing is a proven and cost
effective solution to chronic homelessness. A recent study by
the University of Pennsylvania found that each unit of
supportive housing for homeless people with mental illness in
New York City resulted in public savings of $16,281 per year
in systems of care such as mental health, human services,
health care, veterans' affairs, and corrections.
(5) Current programs for funding services in permanent
supportive housing, other than those administered by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development, were not
designed to be closely coordinated with housing resources,
nor were they designed to meet the multiple needs of people
who are chronically homeless.
SEC. 3. DUTIES OF ADMINISTRATOR OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL
HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION.
Section 501(d) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C.
290aa(d)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (17), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (18), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(19) collaborate with Federal departments and programs
that are part of the President's Interagency Council on
Homelessness, particularly the Department of Housing and
Urban Development, the Department of Labor, and the
Department of Veterans Affairs, and with other agencies
within the Department of Health and Human Services,
particularly the Health Resources and Services
Administration, the Administration on Children and Families,
and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to design
national strategies for providing services in supportive
housing that will assist in ending chronic homelessness and
to implement programs that address chronic homelessness.''.
SEC. 4. GRANTS FOR SERVICES FOR CHRONICALLY HOMELESS
INDIVIDUALS IN SUPPORTIVE HOUSING.
Title V of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 290aa
et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:
[[Page S10740]]
``PART J--GRANTS FOR SERVICES TO END CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS
``SEC. 596. GRANTS FOR SERVICES TO END CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS.
``(a) In General.--
``(1) Grants.--The Secretary shall make grants to entities
described in paragraph (2) for the purpose of carrying out
projects to provide the services described in subsection (c)
to chronically homeless individuals in permanent supportive
housing.
``(2) Eligible entities.--For purposes of paragraph (1), an
entity described in this paragraph is--
``(A) a State or political subdivision of a State, an
Indian tribe or tribal organization, or a public or nonprofit
private entity, including a community-based provider of
homelessness services, health care, housing, or other
services important to individuals experiencing chronic
homelessness; or
``(B) a consortium composed of entities described in
subparagraph (A), which consortium includes a public or
nonprofit private entity that serves as the lead applicant
and has responsibility for coordinating the activities of the
consortium.
``(b) Priorities.--In making grants under subsection (a),
the Secretary shall give priority to applicants demonstrating
that the applicants--
``(1) target funds to individuals or families who--
``(A) have been homeless for longer periods of time or have
experienced more episodes of homelessness than are required
to meet the definition of chronic homelessness under this
section;
``(B) have high rates of utilization of emergency public
systems of care; or
``(C) have a history of interactions with law enforcement
and the criminal justice system;
``(2) have greater funding commitments from State or local
government agencies responsible for overseeing mental health
treatment, substance abuse treatment, medical care, and
employment (including commitments to provide Federal funds in
accordance with subsection (d)(2)(B)(ii)); and
``(3) will provide for an increase in the number of units
of permanent supportive housing that would serve chronically
homeless individuals in the community as a result of an award
of a grant under subsection (a).
``(c) Services.--The services referred to in subsection (a)
are the following:
``(1) Services provided by the grantee or by qualified
subcontractors that promote recovery and self-sufficiency and
address barriers to housing stability, including but not
limited to the following:
``(A) Mental health services, including treatment and
recovery support services.
``(B) Substance abuse treatment and recovery support
services, including counseling, treatment planning, recovery
coaching, and relapse prevention.
``(C) Integrated, coordinated treatment and recovery
support services for co-occurring disorders.
``(D) Health education, including referrals for medical and
dental care.
``(E) Services designed to help individuals make progress
toward self-sufficiency and recovery, including benefits
advocacy, money management, life-skills training, self-help
programs, and engagement and motivational interventions.
``(F) Parental skills and family support.
``(G) Case management.
``(H) Other supportive services that promote an end to
chronic homelessness.
``(2) Services, as described in paragraph (1), that are
delivered to individuals and families who are chronically
homeless and who are scheduled to become residents of
permanent supportive housing within 90 days pending the
location or development of an appropriate unit of housing.
``(3) For individuals and families who are otherwise
eligible, and who have voluntarily chosen to seek other
housing opportunities after a period of tenancy in supportive
housing, services, as described in paragraph (1), that are
delivered, for a period of 90 days after exiting permanent
supportive housing or until the individuals have transitioned
to comprehensive services adequate to meet their current
needs, provided that the purpose of the services is to
support the individuals in their choice to transition into
housing that is responsive to their individual needs and
preferences.
``(d) Matching Funds.--
``(1) In general.--A condition for the receipt of a grant
under subsection (a) is that, with respect to the cost of the
project to be carried out by an applicant pursuant to such
subsection, the applicant agree as follows:
``(A) In the case of the initial grant pursuant to
subsection (i)(1)(A), the applicant will, in accordance with
paragraphs (2) and (3), make available contributions toward
such costs in an amount that is not less than $1 for each $3
of Federal funds provided in the grant.
``(B) In the case of a renewal grant pursuant to subsection
(i)(1)(B), the applicant will, in accordance with paragraphs
(2) and (3), make available contributions toward such costs
in an amount that is not less than $1 for each $1 of Federal
funds provided in the grant.
``(2) Source of contribution.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), contributions made by an applicant are in accordance
with this paragraph if made as follows:
``(A) The contribution is made from funds of the applicant
or from donations from public or private entities.
``(B) Of the contribution--
``(i) not less than 80 percent is from non-Federal funds;
and
``(ii) not more than 20 percent is from Federal funds
provided under programs that--
``(I) are not expressly directed at services for homeless
individuals, but whose purposes are broad enough to include
the provision of a service or services described in
subsection (c) as authorized expenditures under such program;
and
``(II) do not prohibit Federal funds under the program from
being used to provide a contribution that is required as a
condition for obtaining Federal funds.
``(3) Determination of amount contributed.--Contributions
required in paragraph (1) may be in cash or in kind, fairly
evaluated, including plant, equipment, or services. Amounts
provided by the Federal Government, or services assisted or
subsidized to any significant extent by the Federal
Government, may not be included in determining the amount of
non-Federal contributions required in paragraph (2)(B)(i).
``(e) Administrative Expenses.--A condition for the receipt
of a grant under subsection (a) is that the applicant
involved agree that not more than 6 percent of the grant will
be expended for administrative expenses with respect to the
grant.
``(f) Certain Uses of Funds.--Notwithstanding other
provisions of this section, a grantee under subsection (a)
may expend not more than 20 percent of the grant to provide
the services described in subsection (c) to homeless
individuals who are not chronically homeless.
``(g) Application for Grant.--A grant may be made under
subsection (a) only if an application for the grant is
submitted to the Secretary and the application is in such
form, is made in such manner, and contains such agreements,
assurances, and information as the Secretary determines to be
necessary to carry out this section.
``(h) Certain Requirements.--A condition for the receipt of
a grant under subsection (a) is that the applicant involved
demonstrate the following:
``(1) The applicant and all direct providers of services
have the experience, infrastructure, and expertise needed to
ensure the quality and effectiveness of services, which may
be demonstrated by any of the following:
``(A) Compliance with all local, city, county, or State
requirements for licensing, accreditation, or certification
(if any) which are applicable to the proposed project.
``(B) A minimum of two years experience providing
comparable services that do not require licensing,
accreditation, or certification.
``(C) Certification as a Medicaid service provider,
including health care for the homeless programs and community
health centers.
``(D) An executed agreement with a relevant State or local
government agency that will provide oversight over the mental
health, substance abuse, or other services that will be
delivered by the project.
``(2) There is a mechanism for determining whether
residents are chronically homeless. Such a mechanism may rely
on local data systems or records of shelter admission. If
there are no sources of data regarding the duration or number
of homeless episodes, or if such data are unreliable for the
purposes of this subsection, an applicant must demonstrate
that the project will implement appropriate procedures,
taking into consideration the capacity of local homeless
service providers to document episodes of homelessness and
the challenges of engaging persons who have been chronically
homeless, to verify that an individual or family meets the
definition for being chronically homeless under this section.
``(3) The applicant participates in a local, regional, or
statewide homeless management information system.
``(i) Duration of Initial and Renewal Grants; Additional
Provisions Regarding Renewal Grants.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the
period during which payments are made to a grantee under
subsection (a) shall be in accordance with the following:
``(A) In the case of the initial grant, the period of
payments shall be not less than three years and not more than
five years.
``(B) In the case of a subsequent grant (referred to in
this subsection as a `renewal grant'), the period of payments
shall be not more than five years.
``(2) Annual approval; availability of appropriations;
number of grants.--The provision of payments under an initial
or renewal grant is subject to annual approval by the
Secretary of the payments and to the availability of
appropriations for the fiscal year involved to make the
payments. This subsection may not be construed as
establishing a limitation on the number of grants under
subsection (a) that may be made to an entity.
``(3) Additional provisions regarding renewal grants.--
``(A) Priority in making grants.--In making grants under
subsection (a), the Secretary shall give priority to renewal
grants.
``(B) Compliance with minimum standards.--A renewal grant
may be made by the Secretary only if the Secretary determines
that the applicant involved has, in the project carried out
with the grant, maintained compliance with minimum standards
for quality and successful outcomes for housing retention, as
determined by the Secretary.
[[Page S10741]]
``(C) Amount.--The maximum amount of a renewal grant under
this subsection shall not exceed an amount equal to--
``(i) 75 percent of the amount of Federal funds provided in
the final year of the initial grant period; or
``(ii) 50 percent of the total costs of sustaining the
program funded under the grant at the level provided for in
the year preceding the year for which the renewal grant is
being awarded;
as determined by the Secretary.
``(j) Strategic Performance Outcomes and Reports.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall, as a condition of
the receipt of grants under subsection (a), require grantees
to report data regarding the performance outcomes of the
projects carried out pursuant to such subsection. Consistent
with the requirement of the preceding sentence, each
applicant shall measure and report specific performance
outcomes related to the long-term goals of increasing
stability within the community for individuals who have been
chronically homeless, and decreasing recurrence of periods of
homelessness.
``(2) Performance outcomes.--The performance outcomes
identified by a grantee under paragraph (1) shall include,
with respect to individuals who have been chronically
homeless, improvements in--
``(A) housing stability;
``(B) employment and education;
``(C) problems related to substance abuse;
``(D) participation in mental health services; and
``(E) other areas as the Secretary determines appropriate.
``(3) Coordination and consistency with other homeless
assistance programs.--
``(A) Procedures.--In establishing strategic performance
outcomes and reporting requirements under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall develop and implement procedures that
minimize the costs and burdens to grantees and program
participants, and that are practical, streamlined, and
designed for consistency with the requirements of the
homeless assistance programs administered by the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development.
``(B) Applicant coordination.--Applicants under this
section shall coordinate with community stakeholders,
including participants in the local homeless management
information system, concerning the development of systems to
measure performance outcomes and with the Secretary for
assistance with data collection and measurements activities.
``(4) Report.--A grantee shall submit an annual report to
the Secretary that--
``(A) identifies the grantee's progress towards achieving
its strategic performance outcomes; and
``(B) describes other activities conducted by the grantee
to increase the participation, housing stability, and other
improvements in outcomes for individuals who have been
chronically homeless.
``(k) Training and Technical Assistance.--The Secretary,
directly or through awards of grants or contracts to public
or nonprofit private entities, shall provide training and
technical assistance regarding the planning, development, and
provision of services in projects under subsection (a).
``(l) Biennial Reports to Congress.--Not later than two
years after the date of the enactment of the Services for
Ending Long-Term Homelessness Act, and biennially thereafter,
the Secretary shall submit to the Congress a report on
projects under subsection (a) that includes a summary of
information received by the Secretary under subsection (j),
and that describes the impact of the program under subsection
(a) as part of a comprehensive strategy for ending long term
homelessness and improving outcomes for individuals with
mental illness and substance abuse problems.
``(m) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
``(1) The term `chronically homeless' means an individual
or family who--
``(A) is currently homeless;
``(B) has been homeless continuously for at least one year
or has been homeless on at least four separate occasions in
the last three years; and
``(C) has an adult head of household with a disabling
condition, defined as a diagnosable substance use disorder,
serious mental illness, developmental disability, or chronic
physical illness or disability, including the co-occurrence
of two or more of these conditions.
``(2) The term `disabling condition' means a condition that
limits an individual's ability to work or perform one or more
activities of daily living.
``(3) The term `homeless' means sleeping in a place not
meant for human habitation or in an emergency homeless
shelter.
``(4)(A) The term `permanent supportive housing' means
permanent, affordable housing with flexible support services
that are available and designed to help the tenants stay
housed and build the necessary skills to live as
independently as possible. Such term does not include housing
that is time-limited. Supportive housing offers residents
assistance in reaching their full potential, which may
include opportunities to secure other housing that meets
their needs and preferences, based on individual choice
instead of the requirements of time-limited transitional
programs. Under this section, permanent affordable housing
includes but is not limited to permanent housing funded or
assisted through title IV of the McKinney-Vento Homeless
Assistance Act and section (8) of the United States Housing
Act of 1937.
``(B) For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term
`affordable' means within the financial means of individuals
who are extremely low income, as defined by the Secretary of
Housing and Urban Development.
``(n) Funding.--
``(1) Authorization of appropriations.--For the purpose of
carrying out this section, there are authorized to be
appropriated such sums as may be necessary for each of the
fiscal years 2005 through 2009.
``(2) Allocation for training and technical assistance.--Of
the amount appropriated under paragraph (1) for a fiscal
year, the Secretary may reserve not more than 3 percent for
carrying out subsection (k).''.
Mr. REED. Mr. President, I am proud to join my colleague from Ohio,
the Chairman of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Subcommittee of
the Senate HELP Committee, to introduce a bill that we believe will
bring us closer to helping people who experience chronic homelessness
get off the streets, out of shelters and into permanent housing. The
Services for Ending Long-Term Homelessness Act (SELHA) will help local
communities provide health care, mental health and substance abuse
services in conjunction with safe, decent and affordable housing. This
bill is another essential component in the continuum of housing and
supportive service programs geared towards people who have become
homeless in our society.
Nationwide, as many as 3.5 million people experience homelessness
every year. Between 200,000 and 250,000 of them--including at least
12,000 children--experience chronic homelessness. They live on the
streets and in emergency shelters for years on end or cycle between
homelessness, jails, emergency rooms, and other institutions. Many also
confront mental illness, substance addiction or other serious chronic
health conditions. Moreover, because they don't get appropriate and
regular care, these people exact a substantial toll on our public
health systems.
The legislation the Senior Senator from Ohio and I are proposing
today would authorize funding for grants to state and local entities to
offer services to individuals and families in supportive housing to
help bring them out of the downward spiral of homelessness and onto the
road to recovery and self-sufficiency. Permanent supportive housing
combines safe, decent and affordable housing with needed services such
as mental health, substance abuse, employment, health care, and other
services.
Research indicates that supportive housing represents a cost-
effective investment toward the goal of ending long-term homelessness.
In one California supportive housing program, residents experienced a
57 percent decline in emergency room visits, a 58 percent decline in
the number of inpatient hospital days, and a near elimination of their
need for residential mental-health facilities. A study in New York City
found that each unit of supportive housing saved $16,282 per person per
year in public expenditures for emergency care, court and jail costs,
and other public services. After deducting the public benefits, the
average supportive housing unit in New York City cost only $995 per
year. In other words, it costs little more to house and offer
supportive services to people than it does to leave them homeless.
These remarkable findings have led the bipartisan Millennial Housing
Commission, the President's New Freedom Mental Health Commission, the
U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National League of Cities to endorse
the goal of creating 150,000 units of permanent supportive housing.
As the Ranking Member of the Senate Subcommittee on Housing of the
Senate Banking Committee, I am deeply interested in tackling the
challenge of homelessness on several fronts. I have been working on a
bill to reauthorize the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act. My
legislation would realign the incentives behind HUD's homelessness
assistance programs, while more funding would flow to communities that
actually demonstrate a commitment to accomplishing the goals of
preventing and ending homelessness. It would also simplify and
consolidate the three competitive HUD homeless assistance programs into
one program and provide new flexibility in using McKinney-Vento funds.
[[Page S10742]]
The Services for Ending Long-Term Homelessness Act perfectly
compliments these efforts by making sure that communities offering
permanent housing are also able to provide health, education and other
supportive services that are so critical to the ultimate success of
these efforts.
I believe we have the ingenuity and dedication to ensure that
everyone has a safe decent and affordable place to call home. We need
to support innovative solutions, and this bill does just that. It gives
communities some of the resources they need to develop more supportive
housing and move towards ending chronic homelessness, and I am proud to
join my colleague from Ohio in spearheading this initiative.
______
By Mr. DASCHLE (for himself, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Inouye, Mr.
Johnson, Mr. Bingaman, and Ms. Landrieu):
S. 2938. A bill to grant a Federal charter to the National American
Indian Veterans, Incorporated; read the first time.
federal charter for national american indian veterans association
Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, every American knows this photograph. It
is one of the great iconic images of American courage and
determination: the Marines raising the flag at Iwo Jima. What many
Americans probably do not know is that one of the six Marines in this
photo was a Native American. His name was Ira Hayes. He was a full-
blooded Pima Indian, raised on a small farm on the Gila River Indian
Community in Arizona.
Raising the flag with Ira Hayes that day on Iwo Jima were: a coal
miner's son from Pennsylvania who came to America as an infant from
Czechoslovakia; a farm boy from the Rio Grande Valley of Texas; a mill
worker's son from New Hampshire; a former altar boy from Wisconsin, and
a poor kid from eastern Kentucky.
One writer has called this photo `` a triumphant metaphor for the
very soul of the (Marine) Corps.'' It is also something else. It is a
reflection of every war our Nation has ever fought. In every major
military conflict in our Nation's history, Indians have fought side-by-
side with non-Indians. Native Americans served with honor and
distinction in the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812. They served
on both sides in the Civil War. Stand Watie, a Cherokee, was the last
Confederate brigadier general to surrender to the Union troops. And Eli
Parker, a Seneca from New York, was at Appomattox, serving as an aide
to General Ulysses S. Grant when Robert E. Lee surrendered.
Native American soldiers rode with Teddy Roosevelt's Rough Riders in
the charge on San Juan Hill in the Spanish-American War. Twelve-
thousand Indians served in World War I. Even though Native Americans
were denied U.S. citizenship at the time, many were so eager to serve
that they went to Canada to enlist before the U.S. even entered the
war. Their tremendous demonstration of patriotism finally moved
Congress to pass the Indian Citizenship Act in 1924.
In World War II, more than one-third of all able-bodied Indian men
between the ages of 18 and 50 served. The most famous were the ``Code
Talkers'' from the Navajo Nation and other tribes--including the
Lakota, Dakota and Nakota tribes of the Great Sioux Nation. During the
Korean War, two Native American soldiers were awarded posthumous
Congressional Medals of Honor. Another Korean War veteran, a Northern
Cheyenne from Colorado, served with distinction in the Air Force and
later in the United States Senate. He is our friend and colleague, the
chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, Senator Ben Nighthorse
Campbell.
In Vietnam, nearly 42,000 Native Americans served--90 percent of them
volunteers. Native Americans served with honor in Grenada, Panama, the
Persian Gulf war, Somalia, Bosnia and Kosovo. And they are serving our
Nation today in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Given the tragic history between Indian tribes and the U.S. military,
some might regard it as remarkable that Native Americans choose to
serve in the military at all. Yet, not only do Native Americans serve,
they have the highest rate of military service of any ethnic group in
America. Today, one in four Native American men is a military veteran,
as are nearly half of all tribal leaders.
Incredibly, despite this extraordinary history of service and
sacrifice for our Nation, there has never been a national American
Indians veterans organization. Until now.
Last week, a new organization, the National American Indian Veterans
Association, held its first annual meeting in Arizona. At that meeting,
members voted unanimously to approve the organization's charter. Today,
I am introducing a bipartisan proposal to grant the National American
Indian Veterans Association a Federal charter. I am proud to sponsor
this proposal, along with four great champions of Indian people and
tribes: my fellow South Dakotan, Senator Johnson; Senator Bingaman;
Senator Campbell, the distinguished chairman of the Indian Affairs
Committee; and the committee's ranking member, Senator Inouye, a noble
warrior himself and a Medal of Honor recipient.
The National American Indian Veterans Association is long overdue,
and it is desperately needed. Native Americans are the most likely of
all Americans to volunteer for military service. But they are the least
likely of all veterans to apply for the benefits they have earned. When
they do try to claim those benefits, too often, the First Americans
find themselves last in line.
Too many Native American veterans go without urgently needed medical
care because they can't get appointments or they can't overcome
bureaucratic hurdles at the VA or the nearest clinic is too far away.
Too many Native American veterans are living in crowded apartments and
crumbling houses and trailers, partly because homeownership assistance
programs that work for most veterans don't take into account the
specific needs of many Indian veterans. Many Native American veterans
don't claim the education benefits they have earned. Too many Native
American veterans don't get the retirement benefits they deserve. And
when they die, too many of their families don't get the survivors'
benefits they should.
A Federal charter does not grant the National American Indian
Veterans Association any special legal status or favors. It will simply
enable Native American veterans from all tribes to speak with one voice
to Congress and to the Nation.
The National Commander of the National American Indian Veterans
Association is a man I am proud to know. Don Loudner is from Mitchell,
SD. He is a member of the Crow Creek Sioux Tribe and a Korean War
veteran with 35 years in the Army Reserves. He is also a member of the
VA's Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans, a former Commissioner of
Indian Affairs for the State of South Dakota, a former superintendent
of the Crow Creek Sioux Reservation, and one of the most tireless,
articulate advocates for Native American veterans I have ever known.
Congress has chartered many veterans organizations representing
specific groups: the American War Mothers, the Blinded Veterans
Association, Catholic War Veterans, Italian American War Veterans of
the USA, Jewish War Veterans of the USA, the National Association for
Black Veterans, Polish Legion of American Veterans.
I believe the guidance and collected wisdom of the National American
Indian Veterans Association will enable America to better honor its
commitments to Native American veterans and their families. In doing
so, it will strengthen Native Americans' long and exceptional tradition
of military service to our Nation. And that will make America even
safer and stronger.
Five Native American warriors have already given their lives in Iraq.
They include three members of the Navajo Nation: Army Private First
Class Lori Piestewa, a young Hopi mother and the first Native American
woman soldier ever killed in combat; and a young Army Private First
Class from the Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation in South Dakota.
Sheldon Hawk Eagle was a member of the Army's 101st Airborne Division,
the famed ``Screaming Eagles,'' the same unit that parachuted into
Normandy on D-Day. He was also a descendant of the legendary Lakota
warrior leader, Crazy Horse.
There are many reasons that these young warriors and so many other
Native Americans have risked--and
[[Page S10743]]
given--their lives for this Nation. Clarence Wolf Guts may have said it
best. Mr. Wolf Guts is from the Oglala Sioux Tribe and one of the last
two surviving Lakota Code Talkers from World War II. Two weeks ago, he
testified before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs about a bill I
am sponsoring to honor all Native American Code Talkers, from all
tribes. In Clarence Wolf Guts' words, ``Indian people love America, and
we will do whatever it takes to protect our freedom from all
aggressors.''
By formally recognizing the National American Indian Veterans
Association--America's first and only Native American veterans
organization--America will be better able to honor the extraordinary
patriotism of these heroes and provide them with the respect and
benefits they have earned. I urge my colleagues to join us. Let's pass
this bill this year.
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. 2938
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. RECOGNITION AS CORPORATION AND GRANT OF FEDERAL
CHARTER FOR NATIONAL AMERICAN INDIAN VETERANS,
INCORPORATED.
(a) In General.--Part B of subtitle II of title 36, United
States Code, is amended by inserting after chapter 1503 the
following new chapter:
``CHAPTER 1504--NATIONAL AMERICAN INDIAN VETERANS, INCORPORATED
``Sec.
``150401. Organization.
``150402. Purposes.
``150403. Membership.
``150404. Board of directors.
``150405. Officers.
``150406. Nondiscrimination.
``150407. Powers.
``150408. Exclusive right to name, seals, emblems, and badges.
``150409. Restrictions.
``150410. Duty to maintain tax-exempt status.
``150411. Records and inspection.
``150412. Service of process.
``150413. Liability for acts of officers and agents.
``150414. Failure to comply with requirements.
``150415. Annual report.
``Sec. 150401. Organization
``The National American Indian Veterans, Incorporated, a
nonprofit corporation organized in the United States (in this
chapter referred to as the `corporation'), is a federally
chartered corporation.
``Sec. 150402. Purposes
``The purposes of the corporation are those stated in its
articles of incorporation, constitution, and bylaws, and
include a commitment--
``(1) to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United
States while respecting the sovereignty of the American
Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian Nations;
``(2) to unite under one body all American Indian, Alaska
Native, and Native Hawaiian veterans who served in the Armed
Forces of United States;
``(3) to be an advocate on behalf of all American Indian,
Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian veterans without regard to
whether they served during times of peace, conflict, or war;
``(4) to promote social welfare (including educational,
economic, social, physical, cultural values, and traditional
healing) in the United States by encouraging the growth and
development, readjustment, self-respect, self-confidence,
contributions, and self-identity of American Indian veterans;
``(5) to serve as an advocate for the needs of American
Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian veterans, their
families, or survivors in their dealings with all Federal and
State government agencies;
``(6) to promote, support, and utilize research, on a
nonpartisan basis, pertaining to the relationship between the
American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian veterans
and American society; and
``(7) to provide technical assistance to the 12 regional
areas without veterans committees or organizations and
programs by--
``(A) providing outreach service to those Tribes in need;
and
``(B) training and educating Tribal Veterans Service
Officers for those Tribes in need.
``Sec. 150403. Membership
``Subject to section 150406 of this title, eligibility for
membership in the corporation, and the rights and privileges
of members, shall be as provided in the constitution and by-
laws of the corporation.
``Sec. 150404. Board of directors
``Subject to section 150406 of this title, the board of
directors of the corporation, and the responsibilities of the
board, shall be as provided in the constitution and bylaws of
the corporation and in conformity with the laws under which
the corporation is incorporated.
``Sec. 150405. Officers
``Subject to section 150406 of this title, the officers of
the corporation, and the election of such officers, shall be
as provided in the constitution and bylaws of the corporation
and in conformity with the laws of the jurisdiction under
which the corporation is incorporated.
``Sec. 150406. Nondiscrimination
``In establishing the conditions of membership in the
corporation, and in determining the requirements for serving
on the board of directors or as an officer of the
corporation, the corporation may not discriminate on the
basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin,
handicap, or age.
``Sec. 150407. Powers
``The corporation shall have only those powers granted the
corporation through its articles of incorporation and its
constitution and bylaws which shall conform to the laws of
the jurisdiction under which the corporation is incorporated.
``Sec. 150408. Exclusive right to name, seals, emblems, and
badges
``(a) In General.--The corporation shall have the sole and
exclusive right to use the names `National American Indian
Veterans, Incorporated' and `National American Indian
Veterans', and such seals, emblems, and badges as the
corporation may lawfully adopt.
``(b) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to interfere or conflict with established or vested
rights.
``Sec. 150409. Restrictions
``(a) Stock and Dividends.--The corporation shall have no
power to issue any shares of stock nor to declare or pay any
dividends.
``(b) Distribution of Income or Assets.--(1) No part of the
income or assets of the corporation shall inure to any person
who is a member, officer, or director of the corporation or
be distributed to any such person during the life of the
charter granted by this chapter.
``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to
prevent the payment of reasonable compensation to the
officers of the corporation, or reimbursement for actual and
necessary expenses, in amounts approved by the board of
directors.
``(c) Loans.--The corporation shall not make any loan to
any officer, director, member, or employee of the
corporation.
``(d) No Federal Endorsement.--The corporation shall not
claim congressional approval or Federal Government authority
by virtue of the charter granted by this chapter for any of
its activities.
``Sec. 150410. Duty to maintain tax-exempt status
``The corporation shall maintain its status as an
organization exempt from taxation as provided in the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986.
``Sec. 150411. Records and inspection
``(a) Records.--The corporation shall keep--
``(1) correct and complete books and records of accounts;
``(2) minutes of any proceeding of the corporation
involving any of its members, the board of directors, or any
committee having authority under the board of directors; and
``(3) at its principal office, a record of the names and
addresses of all members having the right to vote.
``(b) Inspection.--(1) All books and records of the
corporation may be inspected by any member having the right
to vote, or by any agent or attorney of such member, for any
proper purpose, at any reasonable time.
``(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to
contravene the laws of the jurisdiction under which the
corporation is incorporated or the laws of those
jurisdictions within which the corporation carries on its
activities in furtherance of its purposes within the United
States and its territories.
``Sec. 150412. Service of process
``With respect to service of process, the corporation shall
comply with the laws of the jurisdiction under which the
corporation is incorporated and those jurisdictions within
which the corporation carries on its activities in
furtherance of its purposes within the United States and its
territories.
``Sec. 150413. Liability for acts of officers and agents
``The corporation shall be liable for the acts of the
officers and agents of the corporation when such individuals
act within the scope of their authority.
``Sec. 150414. Failure to comply with requirements
``If the corporation fails to comply with any of the
restrictions or provisions of this chapter, including the
requirement under section 150410 of this title to maintain
its status as an organization exempt from taxation, the
charter granted by this chapter shall expire.
``Sec. 150415. Annual report
``(a) In General.--The corporation shall report annually to
Congress concerning the activities of the corporation during
the preceding fiscal year.
``(b) Submittal Date.--Each annual report under this
section shall be submitted at the same time as the report of
the audit of the corporation required by section 10101(b) of
this title.
``(c) Report Not Public Document.--No annual report under
this section shall be printed as a public document.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters at the
beginning of subtitle II of
[[Page S10744]]
title 36, United States Code, is amended by insert after the
item relating to chapter 1503 the following new item:
``1504. National American Indian Veterans, Incorporated.......150401''.
______
By Mr. LUGAR (for himself, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Feingold,
and Mr. Coleman):
S. 2939. A bill to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to
provide assistance for orphans and other vulnerable children in
developing countries, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Foreign Relations.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Assistance for
Orphans and Other Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of
2004.
The unprecedented AIDS orphan crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has
profound implications for political stability, development, and human
welfare that extend far beyond the region. Sub-Saharan African nations
stand to lose generations of educated and trained professionals who can
contribute meaningfully to their countries' development. Orphaned
children, many of whom are homeless, are more likely to resort to
prostitution and other criminal behavior to survive. Most
frighteningly, these uneducated, poorly socialized, and stigmatized
young adults are extremely vulnerable to being recruited into criminal
gangs, rebel groups, or extremist organizations that offer shelter and
food and act as ``surrogate'' families. It is imperative that the
international community respond to this crisis that threatens stability
within individual countries, the region, and around the world.
An estimated 110 million orphans live in sub-Saharan Africa, Asia,
Latin America, and the Caribbean. The HIV/AIDS pandemic is rapidly
expanding the orphan population. Currently an estimated 14 million
children have been orphaned by AIDS, most of whom live in sub-Saharan
Africa. This number is projected to soar to more than 25 million by
2010. The pandemic is orphaning generations of African children and is
compromising the overall development prospects of their countries.
Most orphans in the developing world live in extremely disadvantaged
circumstances. Poor communities in the developing world struggle to
meet the basic food, clothing, health care, and educational needs of
orphans. Experts recommend supporting community-based organizations to
assist these children. Such an approach enables the children to remain
connected to their communities, traditionals, rituals, and extended
families.
My bill seeks to improve assistance to orphans and other vulnerable
children in developing countries. It would require the United States
Government to develop a comprehensive strategy for providing such
assistance and would authorize the President to support community-based
organizations that provide basic care for orphans and vulnerable
children.
Orphans are less likely to be in school, and more likely to be
working full time. Yet only education can help children acquire the
knowledge and develop the skills they need to build a better future.
Studies have shown that school food programs provide an incentive for
children to stay in school. School meals provide basic nutrition to
children who otherwise do not have access to reliable food.
For many children, the primary barrier to an education is the expense
of school fees, uniforms, supplies, and other costs. My bill aims to
improve enrollment and access to primary school education by supporting
programs that reduce the negative impact of school fees and other
expenses. It also would affirm our commitment to international school
lunch programs.
Many children who lose one or both parents often face difficulty in
asserting their inheritance rights. Even when the inheritance rights of
women and children are spelled out in law, such rights are difficult to
claim and are seldom enforced. In many countries it is difficult or
impossible for a widow--even if she has small children--to claim
property after the death of her husband. This often leaves the most
vulnerable children impoverished and homeless. My bill seeks to support
programs that protect the inheritance rights of orphans and widows with
children.
The AIDS orphan crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has implications for
political stability, development, and human welfare that extend far
beyond the region, affecting governments and people worldwide. Every 14
seconds another child is orphaned by AIDS. Turning the tide on this
crisis will require a coordinated, comprehensive, and swift response. I
am hopeful that Senators will join me in backing this legislation, and
I ask 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. 2939
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 ``Assistance for Orphans and
Other Vulnerable Children in Developing Countries Act of
2004''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) More than 110,000,000 orphans live in sub-Saharan
Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean. These
children often are disadvantaged in numerous and devastating
ways and most households with orphans cannot meet the basic
needs of health care, food, clothing, and educational
expenses.
(2) It is estimated that 121,000,000 children worldwide do
not attend school and that the majority of such children are
young girls. According to the United Nations Children's Fund
(UNICEF), orphans are less likely to be in school and more
likely to be working full time.
(3) School food programs, including take-home rations, in
developing countries provide strong incentives for children
to remain in school and continue their education. School food
programs can reduce short-term hunger, improve cognitive
functions, and enhance learning, behavior, and achievement.
(4) Financial barriers, such as school fees and other costs
of education, prevent many orphans and other vulnerable
children in developing countries from attending school.
Providing children with free primary school education, while
simultaneously ensuring that adequate resources exist for
teacher training and infrastructure, would help more orphans
and other vulnerable children obtain a quality education.
(5) The trauma that results from the loss of a parent can
trigger behavior problems of aggression or emotional
withdrawal and negatively affect a child's performance in
school and the child's social relations. Children living in
families affected by HIV/AIDS or who have been orphaned by
AIDS often face stigmatization and discrimination. Providing
culturally appropriate psychosocial support to such children
can assist them in successfully accepting and adjusting to
their circumstances.
(6) Orphans and other vulnerable children in developing
countries routinely are denied their inheritance or encounter
difficulties in claiming the land and other property which
they have inherited. Even when the inheritance rights of
women and children are spelled out in law, such rights are
difficult to claim and are seldom enforced. In many countries
it is difficult or impossible for a widow, even if she has
young children, to claim property after the death of her
husband.
(7) The HIV/AIDS pandemic has had a devastating affect on
children and is deepening poverty in entire communities and
jeopardizing the health, safety, and survival of all children
in affected areas.
(8) The HIV/AIDS pandemic has increased the number of
orphans worldwide and has exacerbated the poor living
conditions of the world's poorest and most vulnerable
children. AIDS has created an unprecedented orphan crisis,
especially in sub-Saharan Africa, where children have been
hardest hit. An estimated 14,000,000 orphans have lost 1 or
both parents to AIDS. By 2010, it is estimated that over
25,000,000 children will have been orphaned by AIDS.
(9) Approximately 2,500,000 children under the age of 15
worldwide have HIV/AIDS. Every day another 2,000 children
under the age of 15 are infected with HIV. Without treatment,
most children born with HIV can expect to die by age two, but
with sustained drug treatment through childhood, the chances
of long-term survival and a productive adulthood improve
dramatically.
(10) Few international development programs specifically
target the treatment of children with HIV/AIDS in developing
countries. Reasons for this include the perceived low
priority of pediatric treatment, a lack of pediatric health
care professionals, lack of expertise and experience in
pediatric drug dosing and monitoring, the perceived
complexity of pediatric treatment, and mistaken beliefs
regarding the risks and benefits of pediatric treatment.
(11) Although a number of organizations seek to meet the
needs of orphans or other vulnerable children, extended
families and local communities continue to be the primary
providers of support for such children.
(12) The HIV/AIDS pandemic is placing huge burdens on
communities and is leaving many orphans with little support.
Alternatives to traditional orphanages, such as community-
based resource centers, continue to evolve in response to the
massive number of orphans that has resulted from the
pandemic.
[[Page S10745]]
(13) The AIDS orphans crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has
implications for political stability, human welfare, and
development that extend far beyond the region, affecting
governments and people worldwide, and this crisis requires an
accelerated response from the international community.
(14) Although section 403(b) of the United States
Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Act of
2003 (22 U.S.C. 7673(b)) establishes the requirement that not
less than 10 percent of amounts appropriated for HIV/AIDS
assistance for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2008 shall
be expended for assistance for orphans and other vulnerable
children affected by HIV/AIDS, there is an urgent need to
provide assistance to such children prior to 2006.
(15) Numerous United States and indigenous private
voluntary organizations, including faith-based organizations,
provide assistance to orphans and other vulnerable children
in developing countries. Many of these organizations have
submitted applications for grants to the Administrator of the
United States Agency for International Development to provide
increased levels of assistance for orphans and other
vulnerable children in developing countries.
(16) Increasing the amount of assistance that is provided
by the Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development through United States and
indigenous private voluntary organizations, including faith-
based organizations, will provide greater protection for
orphans and other vulnerable children in developing
countries.
(17) It is essential that the United States Government
adopt a comprehensive approach for the provision of
assistance to orphans and other vulnerable children in
developing countries. A comprehensive approach would ensure
that important services, such as basic care, psychosocial
support, school food programs, increased educational
opportunities and employment training and related services,
the protection and promotion of inheritance rights for such
children, and the treatment of orphans and other vulnerable
children with HIV/AIDS, are made more accessible.
(18) Assistance for orphans and other vulnerable children
can best be provided by a comprehensive approach of the
United States Government that--
(A) ensures that Federal agencies and the private sector
coordinate efforts to prevent and eliminate duplication of
efforts and waste in the provision of such assistance; and
(B) to the maximum extent possible, focuses on community-
based programs that allow orphans and other vulnerable
children to remain connected to the traditions and rituals of
their families and communities.
SEC. 3. ASSISTANCE FOR ORPHANS AND OTHER VULNERABLE CHILDREN
IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES.
Chapter 1 of part I of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961
(22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following section:
``SEC. 135. ASSISTANCE FOR ORPHANS AND OTHER VULNERABLE
CHILDREN.
``(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
``(1) There are more than 110,000,000 orphans living in
sub-Saharan Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Caribbean.
``(2) The HIV/AIDS pandemic has created an unprecedented
orphan crisis, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, where
children have been hardest hit. The pandemic is deepening
poverty in entire communities, and is jeopardizing the
health, safety, and survival of all children in affected
countries. It is estimated that 14,000,000 children have lost
one or both parents to AIDS.
``(3) The orphans crisis in sub-Saharan Africa has
implications for human welfare, development, and political
stability that extend far beyond the region, affecting
governments and people worldwide.
``(4) Extended families and local communities are
struggling to meet the basic needs of orphans and vulnerable
children by providing food, health care including treatment
of children living with HIV/AIDS, education expenses, and
clothing.
``(5) Providing assistance to such children is an important
expression of the humanitarian concern and tradition of the
people of the United States.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) AIDS.--The term `AIDS' has the meaning given the term
in section 104A(g)(1) of this Act.
``(2) Children.--The term `children' means persons who have
not attained the age of 18.
``(3) HIV/AIDS.--The term `HIV/AIDS' has the meaning given
the term in section 104A(g)(3) of this Act.
``(4) Orphan.--The term `orphan' means a child deprived by
death of one or both parents.
``(5) Psychosocial support.--The term `psychosocial
support' includes care that addresses the ongoing
psychological and social problems that affect individuals,
their partners, families, and caregivers in order to
alleviate suffering, strengthen social ties and integration,
provide emotional support, and promote coping strategies.
``(c) Assistance.--The President is authorized to provide
assistance, including providing such assistance through
international or nongovernmental organizations, for programs
in developing countries to provide basic care and services
for orphans and other vulnerable children. Such programs
should provide assistance--
``(1) to support families and communities to mobilize their
own resources through the establishment of community-based
organizations to provide basic care for orphans and other
vulnerable children;
``(2) for school food programs, including the purchase of
local or regional foodstuffs where appropriate;
``(3) to increase primary school enrollment through the
elimination of school fees, where appropriate, or other
barriers to education while ensuring that adequate resources
exist for teacher training and infrastructure;
``(4) to provide employment training and related services
for orphans and other vulnerable children who are of legal
working age;
``(5) to protect and promote the inheritance rights of
orphans, other vulnerable children, and widows;
``(6) to provide culturally appropriate psychosocial
support to orphans and other vulnerable children; and
``(7) to treat orphans and other vulnerable children with
HIV/AIDS through the provision of pharmaceuticals, the
recruitment and training of individuals to provide pediatric
treatment, and the purchase of pediatric-specific
technologies.
``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to the President to carry out this section such sums as may
be necessary for each of the fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
``(2) Availability of funds.--Amounts made available under
paragraph (1) are authorized to remain available until
expended and are in addition to amounts otherwise available
for such purposes.
``(3) Relationship to other laws.--Amounts made available
for assistance pursuant to this subsection, and amounts made
available for such assistance pursuant to any other provision
of law, may be used to provide such assistance
notwithstanding any other provision of law.''.
SEC. 4. STRATEGY OF THE UNITED STATES.
(a) Requirement for Strategy.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the President shall
develop, and submit to the appropriate congressional
committees, a strategy for coordinating, implementing, and
monitoring assistance programs for orphans and vulnerable
children.
(b) Consultation.--The President should consult with
employees of the field missions of the United States Agency
for International Development in developing the strategy
required by subsection (a) to ensure that such strategy--
(1) will not impede the efficiency of implementing
assistance programs for orphans and vulnerable children; and
(2) addresses the specific needs of indigenous populations.
(c) Content.--The strategy required by subsection (a) shall
include--
(1) the identity of each agency or department of the
Federal Government that is providing assistance for orphans
and vulnerable children in foreign countries;
(2) a description of the efforts of the head of each such
agency or department to coordinate the provision of such
assistance with other agencies or departments of the Federal
Government or nongovernmental entities;
(3) a description of a coordinated strategy, including
coordination with other bilateral and multilateral donors, to
provide the assistance authorized in section 135 of the
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as added by section 3 of this
Act;
(4) an analysis of additional coordination mechanisms or
procedures that could be implemented to carry out the
purposes of such section;
(5) a description of a monitoring system that establishes
performance goals for the provision of such assistance and
expresses such goals in an objective and quantifiable form,
to the extent feasible; and
(6) a description of performance indicators to be used in
measuring or assessing the achievement of the performance
goals described in paragraph (5).
SEC. 5. ANNUAL REPORT.
Not later than one year after the date on which the
President submits the strategy required by section 4(a) to
the appropriate congressional committees, and annually
thereafter, the President shall submit a report to the
appropriate congressional committees on the implementation of
this Act.
SEC. 6. APPROPRIATE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES DEFINED.
In this Act, the term ``appropriate congressional
committees'' means the Committee on Appropriations and the
Committee on Foreign Relations of the Senate and the
Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on
International Relations of the House of Representatives.
______
By Mr. PRYOR (for himself, Mrs. Lincoln, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Baucus, Mr.
Bayh, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Boxer, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs. Clinton, Mr.
Corzine, Mr. Daschle, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Dorgan, Mr. Durbin, Mr.
Feingold, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Graham of Florida, Mr. Jeffords, Mr.
Johnson, Mr. Kennedy, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr.
Levin, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Miller, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Nelson
of Florida, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mr. Reid, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr.
Sarbanes, Mr. Schumer, and Ms. Stabenow):
S. 2942. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
that
[[Page S10746]]
combat pay be treated as earned income for purposes of the earned
income credit; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I know the hour is late, and I will try to
keep my comments fairly brief. I promise I will not take more than an
hour or two.
What I am showing tonight is a picture of some American heroes.
Oftentimes we look at a person in uniform and say: That's a hero.
Certainly, the folks injured and killed in combat we see them as
heroes. But you are really just a hero if you serve, if you put on your
uniform and do your duty to your country.
The other heroes in this picture are this soldier's family. We can
see they are hugging him and supporting him, and that is really part of
the definition of a hero as well. Certainly, the folks who are not
pictured here--this man's employer because he is probably in the Guard
or Reserve, and folks in the community, people in his church or his
neighborhood--whatever the circumstances may be--they are heroes in
this picture.
We thank all of our soldiers who are serving bravely for our country,
wherever they may be tonight. I want to thank the conferees, who worked
so hard on the Working Families Tax Relief Act last week, for including
the provisions of S. 2417, the Tax Relief for Americans in Combat Act
or, as some people call it, TRAC.
One thing that TRAC was designed to do was eliminate the combat pay
penalty. I introduced TRAC back in May of this year. The rationale for
introducing TRAC was to help our men and women in combat. In fact, in
my work on the Armed Services Committee, and with the help of Chairman
Grassley and Ranking Member Baucus, the committee requested a GAO
report. We became concerned in the Armed Services Committee about the
tax package that is available to our soldiers, Marines, airmen and
seamen. So Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Baucus were gracious
enough to request a GAO report.
In essence, what the GAO report found was a glitch in the Tax Code,
an unintended consequence. Basically, what they found is that if one is
a soldier and receives combat pay, which means they are in theater and
they are in harm's way every day, they receive their combat pay and
they want to claim their earned income tax credit, which many of these
individuals are entitled to under our Tax Code, they actually can lose
money on their taxes by receiving their combat pay. That is why I call
it the ``combat pay penalty,'' because it really does disadvantage some
people on their taxes.
I have a chart that illustrates what I am talking about. If someone
is working in a hardware store 12 months out of the year, let's say
they were making $16,000 a year annually, under the earned income tax
system that we have on our books right now, $4,100 may possibly come
back to him under the EITC. If that same person works in a hardware
store, say, for 4 months, and he is in the guard or reserve and he gets
8 months for his military service and he makes the same $16,000, by the
time he does the math and he fills out his tax form he is only entitled
to $2,100 under the earned income tax credit.
What we are doing is, inadvertently we are putting our soldiers at a
disadvantage. In other words, this soldier in this example has lost on
his taxes about $2,000. Clearly, this is not the intent of Congress.
The way I feel about it--and I know a lot of my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle feel about this--is while our brave soldiers are
overseas fighting for us, we need to be in Washington fighting for them
and their families. I think it is just incumbent upon us to recognize
the principle that we need to take care of those who take care of us.
There is no one in the world who is doing a better job taking care of
us than our men and women in combat.
Under the provisions of a bill that I will file this evening, the
provisions are very simple. What it will do is allow men and women in
uniform serving in combat to include combat pay for the purpose of
calculating their earned income and their child tax credit benefits. If
that calculation works in their best interest, it gives them control
over their taxes and allows them to make the determination for what is
in their best interest on their taxes.
Again, I want to thank the conference, and the Senate, House, and the
President for signing it, because we did win a short-term victory on
this. We got this provision on the earned income tax credit for 2
years. Everything else in the bill was 5 years, but we did get 2 years.
It is a short-term victory, something I hope we will be able to go back
and change and make it a long-term solution for these brave Americans.
I do not want to speak to all the intricacies of the earned income
tax credit because I have heard Senators in this Chamber say that it is
basically a Tax Code for a welfare program. I disagree with that. We
may have an honest disagreement about that. Clearly, our men and women
in uniform receiving combat pay are working hard. We know this is not a
welfare program for them. We know they are not going to abuse this or
they are not going to miscalculate it. We have a high degree of
confidence that this is going to be good for them and good for all of
us.
Anyway, I want to draw the attention of my colleagues to the next
chart, which is the earned income tax credit. This chart shows how it
is structured. Depending on a person's situation, if they have no
child, one child, two or more children, it shows a sort of range of
possibilities, depending on what one's income is. Obviously, it is like
a formula where the numbers have to be plugged in. It is different for
different people.
As we can see, a soldier who is making, say, about $6,300 ought to
get about $390 from the earned income tax credit. Whereas a soldier who
is down on the income scale, making $1,400, should get about $2,600 in
earned income tax credit. So, again, this will change depending on
the situation.
What we are proposing would allow our soldiers, our men and women in
uniform, to take advantage of an existing provision of the Tax Code and
maximize it to their full advantage.
I am not saying that we can get this done this week. We certainly
understand that we are out of legislative days, but I hope sincerely
that we can come back in the lame duck session or whenever we reconvene
and really get serious about helping our men and women in uniform.
We fixed the earned income tax credit for 2004 and 2005.
Here is another chart showing some of the numbers and how it would
work, again, depending on how many months one is in combat. Just
depending on the various losses that one might have, we can see based
on this chart and the numbers here, the soldiers who are impacted the
most are the enlisted men. Officers can be penalized under this, but
the enlisted men and women are the ones who are probably at the
greatest danger of losing their tax benefit.
One reason that Senators have decided to help me on this--we have, I
believe 36 cosponsors now who have signed up to help out on this--is
because it is a cheap fix. When we look at the numbers for 2 years,
2006 and 2007, we are only talking about $15 million. When we talk
about taxes in this country, we talk about billions or trillions, but
over 2 years this is only $15 million. Over 10 years it is only $68
million. That is not a lot of money. That is really peanuts in the
grand scheme of things when we are talking about our Tax Code and other
numbers that we talk about, when we talk about fixing our taxes in this
country. This is real money for these soldiers in uniform.
I close with another picture of some heroes to remind us what this is
all about, who we are trying to help. These soldiers, most of them, are
relatively low-income because one has to be relatively low-income to
even qualify for the earned income tax credit. They are leaving their
families behind. Many of them are leaving jobs, homes, all kinds of
economic security. Like I said, these are the folks who are taking care
of us, and I think in the Senate and in the Congress we ought to do our
part to take care of them.
Mrs. LINCOLN: Mr. President, I rise to join my colleagues Senators
Pryor and Baucus in introducing legislation to ensure members of the
military who serve in combat are not treated unfairly under the tax
code. I believe strongly that we have an obligation in Congress to take
care of the brave men and women in uniform who risk their lives to take
care of us.
[[Page S10747]]
As my friend and colleague Senator Pryor mentioned, the provision in
the Tax Code we are seeking to amend affects the ability of military
personnel who serve in combat zones to benefit from the Earned Income
Tax Credit. Due to an unintended consequence in the tax code, those
affected may loose up to $4,000 in tax relief simply because they have
volunteered to defend our freedom.
This is wrong.
We corrected the problem for 2 years--until 2006--in the Working
Families Tax Relief Act which Congress recently approved but we didn't
resolve the matter appropriately in my judgement. I offered an
amendment during the conference report to bring tax relief for military
families in line with the other provisions in the bill but that
amendment was rejected.
I hope my colleagues will reconsider.
The men and women in uniform who serve in harm's way and their
families here at home are the last people we should burden with
uncertainty in the Tax Code. I think we should fix this problem without
delay and that is why l am proud to join in this effort.
I applaud Senator Pryor for his leadership and hard work on this
issue, and I yield the floor.
____________________