[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 53 (Wednesday, April 27, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4399-S4428]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. CONRAD:
S. 911. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
provide for reimbursement of certified midwife services and to provide
for more equitable reimbursement rates for certified nurse-midwife
services; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Improving
Access to Nurse-Midwifery Care Act of 2005. For too many years,
certified nurse midwives, CNMs, have not received adequate
reimbursement under the Medicare program, despite evidence that shows
the quality of care and outcomes for services provided by CNMs are
comparable to obstetricians and gynecologists. My legislation takes
important steps to improve reimbursement for these important healthcare
providers.
There are approximately three million disabled women on Medicare who
are of childbearing age; however, if they choose to utilize a CNM for
``well women'' services, the CNM is only reimbursed at 65 percent of
the physician fee schedule. In practical terms, the typical well-woman
visit costs, on average, $50. But Medicare currently reimburses CNMs in
rural areas only $14 for this visit, which could include a pap smear,
mammogram, and other pre-cancer screenings. CNMs administer the same
tests and incur the same costs as physicians but receive only 65
percent of the physician fee schedule for these services. This reduced
payment is unfair and does not adequately reflect the services CNMs
provide to beneficiaries. At this incredibly low rate of reimbursement,
the Medicare Payment Advisory Committee, MedPAC, agrees that a CNM
simply cannot afford to provide services to Medicare patients and has
supported increasing reimbursement for CNMs.
My legislation would make several changes to improve the ability of
CNMs and certified midwives, CMs, to effectively serve the Medicare-
eligible population. First, and most importantly, my bill recognizes
the need to increase Medicare reimbursement for CNMs by raising the
reimbursement level from 65 percent to 100 percent of the physician fee
schedule. CNMs provide the same care as physicians; therefore, it is
only fair to reimburse CNMs at the same level.
In addition, the Improving Access to Nurse-Midwifery Care Act would
guarantee payment for graduate medical education and includes technical
corrections that will clarify the reassignment of billing rights for
CNMs who are employed by others. Finally, my bill would establish
recognition for a certified midwife, CM, to provide services under
Medicare. Despite the fact that CNMs and CMs provide the same services,
Medicare has yet to recognize CMs as eligible providers. My bill would
change this.
This bill will enhance access to ``well woman'' care for thousands of
women in underserved communities and make several needed changes to
improve access to midwives. I urge my colleagues to support this
legislation.
______
By Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr.
Kerry, Mr. Jeffords, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Schumer, and
Mr. Durbin):
S. 912. A bill to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to
clarify the jurisdiction of the United States over waters of the United
States; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing important
legislation to affirm Federal jurisdiction over the waters of the
United States. I am pleased to have three members of the Environment
and Public Works Committee--the Senator from Vermont, Mr. Jeffords, the
Senator from New Jersey, Mr. Lautenberg, the Senator from California,
Mrs. Boxer--as original cosponsors of this bill. I also thank Senators
Dayton, Kerry, Schumer, and Durbin for joining me in introducing this
important legislation.
In the U.S. Supreme Court's January 2001 decision, Solid Waste Agency
of Northern Cook County versus the Army Corps of Engineers, a 5 to 4
majority limited the authority of Federal agencies to use the so-called
migratory bird rule as the basis for asserting Clean Water Act
jurisdiction over non-
[[Page S4400]]
navigable, intrastate, isolated wetlands, streams, ponds, and other
bodies of water.
This decision, known as the SWANCC decision, means that the
Environmental Protection Agency and Army Corps of Engineers can no
longer enforce Federal Clean Water Act protection mechanisms to protect
a waterway solely on the basis that it is used as habitat for migratory
birds.
In its discussion of the case, the Court went beyond the issue of the
migratory bird rule and questioned whether Congress intended the Clean
Water Act to provide protection for isolated ponds, streams, wetlands
and other waters, as it had been interpreted to provide for most of the
last 30 years. While not the legal holding of the case, the Court's
discussion has resulted in a wide variety of interpretations by EPA and
Corps officials that jeopardize protection for wetlands, and other
waters. The wetlands at risk include prairie potholes and bogs,
familiar to many in Wisconsin, and many other types of wetlands.
In effect, the Court's decision removed much of the Clean Water Act
protection for between 30 percent to 60 percent of the Nation's
wetlands. An estimated 60 percent of the wetlands in my home State of
Wisconsin lost Federal protection. Wisconsin is not alone. The National
Association of State Wetland Managers has been collecting data from
States across the country. For example, Nebraska estimates that it will
lose protection for more than 40 percent of its wetlands. Indiana
estimates it will lose 31 percent of total wetland acreage and 74
percent of the total number of wetlands. Delaware estimates the loss of
protection for 33 percent or more of its freshwater wetlands.
These wetlands absorb floodwaters, prevent pollution from reaching
our rivers and streams, and provide crucial habitat for most of the
Nation's ducks and other waterfowl, as well as hundreds of other bird,
fish, shellfish and amphibian species. Loss of these waters would have
a devastating effect on our environment.
In addition, by narrowing the water and wetland areas subject to
federal regulation, the decision also shifts more of the economic
burden for regulating wetlands to state and local governments. My home
State of Wisconsin has passed legislation to assume the regulation of
isolated waters, but many other States have not. This patchwork of
regulation means that the standards for protection of wetlands
nationwide are unclear and confusing, jeopardizing the migratory birds
and other wildlife that depend on these wetlands.
Since 2001, the confusion over the interpretation of the SWANCC
decision has grown. On January 15, 2003, the EPA and Army Corps of
Engineers published in the Federal Register an Advanced Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking raising questions about the jurisdiction of the
Clean Water Act. Simultaneously, they released a guidance memo to their
field staff regarding Clean Water Act jurisdiction.
The agencies claim these actions are necessary because of the SWANCC
case. But both the guidance memo and the proposed rulemaking go far
beyond the holding in SWANCC. The guidance took effect right away and
has had an immediate impact. It tells the Corps and EPA staff to stop
asserting jurisdiction over isolated waters without first obtaining
permission from headquarters. Based on this guidance, waters that the
EPA and Corps judge to be outside the Clean Water Act can be filled,
dredged, and polluted without a permit or any other long-standing Clean
Water Act safeguard.
The rulemaking announced the Administration's intention to consider
even broader changes to Clean Water Act coverage for our waters.
Specifically, the agencies are questioning whether there is any basis
for asserting Clean Water Act jurisdiction over additional waters, like
intermittent streams. The possibility for a redefinition of our waters
is troubling because there is only one definition of the term ``water''
in the Clean Water Act. The wetlands program, the point source program
which stops the dumping of pollution, and the non-point program
governing polluted runoff all depend on this definition. Even though
the Administration rescinded this proposed rulemaking in December 2003,
the policy guidance remains in effect.
If we don't protect a category of waters from being filled under the
wetlands program, we also fail to protect them from having trash or raw
sewage dumped in them, or having other activities that violate the
Clean Water Act conducted in them as well.
Congress needs to re-establish the common understanding of the Clean
Water Act's jurisdiction to protect all waters of the U.S.--the
understanding that Congress held when the Act was adopted in 1972--as
reflected in the law, legislative history, and longstanding
regulations, practice, and judicial interpretations prior to the SWANCC
decision.
The proposed legislation is very simple. It does three things. First,
it adopts a statutory definition of ``waters of the United States''
based on a longstanding definition of waters in the EPA and Corps of
Engineers' regulations. Second, it deletes the term ``navigable'' from
the Act to clarify that Congress's primary concern in 1972 was to
protect the nation's waters from pollution, rather than just sustain
the navigability of waterways, and to reinforce that original intent.
Finally, it includes a set of findings that explain the factual basis
for Congress to assert its constitutional authority over waters and
wetlands on all relevant constitutional grounds, including the Commerce
Clause, the Property Clause, the Treaty Clause, and Necessary and
Proper Clause.
In conclusion, I am very pleased to have the support of so many
environmental and conservation groups, as well as organizations that
represent those who regulate and manage our country's wetlands, such
as: the Natural Resources Defense Council, Earthjustice, the National
Wildlife Federation, Sierra Club, American Rivers, the National Audubon
Society, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Defenders of Wildlife,
the Ocean Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, the Izaac Walton League, and
the Association of State Floodplain Managers. They know, as I do, that
we need to re-affirm the Federal Government's role in protecting our
water. This legislation is a first step in doing just that.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the legislation be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 912
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 ``Clean Water Authority
Restoration Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this Act are as follows:
(1) To reaffirm the original intent of Congress in enacting
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(86 Stat. 816) to restore and maintain the chemical,
physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the
United States.
(2) To clearly define the waters of the United States that
are subject to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
(3) To provide protection to the waters of the United
States to the fullest extent of the legislative authority of
Congress under the Constitution.
SEC. 3. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Water is a unique and precious resource that is
necessary to sustain human life and the life of animals and
plants.
(2) Water is used not only for human, animal, and plant
consumption, but is also important for agriculture,
transportation, flood control, energy production, recreation,
fishing and shellfishing, and municipal and commercial uses.
(3) In enacting amendments to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act in 1972 and through subsequent amendment,
including the Clean Water Act of 1977 (91 Stat. 1566) and the
Water Quality Act of 1987 (101 Stat. 7), Congress established
the national objective of restoring and maintaining the
chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of
the United States and recognized that achieving this
objective requires uniform, minimum national water quality
and aquatic ecosystem protection standards to restore and
maintain the natural structures and functions of the aquatic
ecosystems of the United States.
(4) Water is transported through interconnected hydrologic
cycles, and the pollution, impairment, or destruction of any
part of an aquatic system may affect the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of other parts of the aquatic
system.
(5) Protection of intrastate waters, along with other
waters of the United States, is necessary to restore and
maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of
all waters in the United States.
(6) The regulation of discharges of pollutants into
interstate and intrastate waters is
[[Page S4401]]
an integral part of the comprehensive clean water regulatory
program of the United States.
(7) Small and periodically-flowing streams comprise the
majority of all stream channels in the United States and
serve critical biological and hydrological functions that
affect entire watersheds, including reducing the introduction
of pollutants to large streams and rivers, and especially
affecting the life cycles of aquatic organisms and the flow
of higher order streams during floods.
(8) The pollution or other degradation of waters of the
United States, individually and in the aggregate, has a
substantial relation to and effect on interstate commerce.
(9) Protection of the waters of the United States,
including intrastate waters, is necessary to prevent
significant harm to interstate commerce and sustain a robust
system of interstate commerce in the future.
(10) Waters, including wetlands, provide protection from
flooding, and draining or filling wetlands and channelizing
or filling streams, including intrastate wetlands and
streams, can cause or exacerbate flooding, placing a
significant burden on interstate commerce.
(11) Millions of people in the United States depend on
wetlands and other waters of the United States to filter
water and recharge surface and subsurface drinking water
supplies, protect human health, and create economic
opportunity.
(12) Millions of people in the United States enjoy
recreational activities that depend on intrastate waters,
such as waterfowl hunting, bird watching, fishing, and
photography and other graphic arts, and those activities and
associated travel generate billions of dollars of income each
year for the travel, tourism, recreation, and sporting
sectors of the economy of the United States.
(13) Activities that result in the discharge of pollutants
into waters of the United States are commercial or economic
in nature.
(14) States have the responsibility and right to prevent,
reduce, and eliminate pollution of waters, and the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act respects the rights and
responsibilities of States by preserving for States the
ability to manage permitting, grant, and research programs to
prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution, and to establish
standards and programs more protective of a State's waters
than is provided under Federal standards and programs.
(15) Protecting the quality of and regulating activities
affecting the waters of the United States is a necessary and
proper means of implementing treaties to which the United
States is a party, including treaties protecting species of
fish, birds, and wildlife.
(16) Protecting the quality of and regulating activities
affecting the waters of the United States is a necessary and
proper means of protecting Federal land, including hundreds
of millions of acres of parkland, refuge land, and other land
under Federal ownership and the wide array of waters
encompassed by that land.
(17) Protecting the quality of and regulating activities
affecting the waters of the United States is necessary to
protect Federal land and waters from discharges of pollutants
and other forms of degradation.
SEC. 4. DEFINITION OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES.
Section 502 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33
U.S.C. 1362) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraph (7);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (8) through (23) as
paragraphs (7) through (22), respectively; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(23) Waters of the united states.--The term `waters of
the United States' means all waters subject to the ebb and
flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate
and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes,
rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats,
sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows,
playa lakes, natural ponds, and all impoundments of the
foregoing, to the fullest extent that these waters, or
activities affecting these waters, are subject to the
legislative power of Congress under the Constitution.''.
SEC. 5. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.) is amended--
(1) by striking ``navigable waters of the United States''
each place it appears and inserting ``waters of the United
States'';
(2) in section 304(l)(1) by striking ``navigable waters''
in the heading and inserting ``waters of the united states'';
and
(3) by striking ``navigable waters'' each place it appears
and inserting ``waters of the United States''.
______
By Mr. DOMENICI (for himself and Mr. Bingaman):
S. 913. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to establish a
university transportation center to be known as the ``Southwest Bridge
Research Center''; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
creating the Bridge Research Center at New Mexico State University. I
would also like to thank my good friend Senator Bingaman for
cosponsoring this important bill.
New Mexico State University (NMSU) is uniquely qualified to be the
home of the Bridge Research Center. For over three decades NMSU has
applied its considerable talents to solving technological problems
related to bridge systems. It makes sense that we capitalize on NMSU's
history and expertise in this field by establishing the bridge research
center.
The Bridge Research Center will develop smart bridge evaluation
techniques using advanced sensors and instrumentation. Additionally,
the NMSU Bridge Center will improve bridge design methodologies, create
new inspection techniques for bridges, and find better ways to conduct
nondestructive evaluation and testing. Finally, the Bridge Center will
conduct research into high performance materials to address durability
and retrofit needs.
I have no doubt that NMSU will apply its extensive capability to
develop theoretical concepts into practical solutions for bridge
problems all across our country.
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. 913
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 ``Southwest Bridge Research
Center Establishment Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. BRIDGE RESEARCH CENTER.
Section 5505 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(k) Southwest Bridge Research Center.--
``(1) In general.--In addition to the university
transportation centers receiving grants under subsections (a)
and (b), the Secretary shall provide grants to New Mexico
State University, in collaboration with the Oklahoma
Transportation Center, to establish and operate a university
transportation center to be known as the `Southwest Bridge
Research Center' (referred to in this subsection as the
`Center').
``(2) Purpose.--The purpose of the Center shall be to
contribute at a national level to a systems approach to
improving the overall performance of bridges, with an
emphasis on--
``(A) increasing the number of highly skilled individuals
entering the field of transportation;
``(B) improving the monitoring of structural health over
the life of bridges;
``(C) developing innovative technologies for bridge testing
and assessment;
``(D) developing technologies and procedures for ensuring
bridge safety, reliability, and security; and
``(E) providing training in the methods for bridge
inspection and evaluation.
``(3) Objectives.--The Center shall carry out--
``(A) basic and applied research, the products of which
shall be judged by peers or other experts in the field to
advance the body of knowledge in transportation;
``(B) an education program that includes multidisciplinary
course work and participation in research; and
``(C) Aa ongoing program of technology transfer that makes
research results available to potential users in a form that
can be implemented.
``(4) Maintenance of effort.--To be eligible to receive a
grant under this subsection, the institution specified in
paragraph (1) shall enter into an agreement with the
Secretary to ensure that, for each fiscal year after
establishment of the Center, the institution will fund
research activities relating to transportation in an amount
that is at least equal to the average annual amount of funds
expended for the activities for the 2 fiscal years preceding
the fiscal year in which the grant is received.
``(5) Cost sharing.--
``(A) Federal share.--The Federal share of the cost of any
activity carried out using funds from a grant provided under
this subsection shall be 50 percent.
``(B) Non-federal share.--The non-Federal share of the cost
of any activity carried out using funds from a grant provided
under this subsection may include funds provided to the
recipient under any of sections 503, 504(b), and 505 of title
23.
``(C) Ongoing programs.--After establishment of the Center,
the institution specified in paragraph (1) shall obligate for
each fiscal year not less than $200,000 in regularly budgeted
institutional funds to support ongoing transportation
research and education programs.
``(6) Program coordination.--
``(A) Coordination.--The Secretary shall--
``(i) coordinate the research, education, training, and
technology transfer activities carried out by the Center;
``(ii) disseminate the results of that research; and
``(iii) establish and operate a clearinghouse for
information derived from that research.
``(B) Annual review and evaluation.--At least annually, and
in accordance with the plan developed under section 508 of
title 23,
[[Page S4402]]
the Secretary shall review and evaluate each program carried
out by the Center using funds from a grant provided under
this subsection.
``(7) Limitation on availability of funds.--Funds made
available to carry out this subsection shall remain available
for obligation for a period of 2 years after the last day of
the fiscal year for which the funds are authorized.
``(8) Amount of grant.--For each of fiscal years 2005
through 2010, the Secretary shall provide a grant in the
amount of $3,000,000 to the institution specified in
paragraph (1) to carry out this subsection.
``(9) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than
the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this subsection
$3,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2010.''.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague
Senator Domenici today to introduce legislation that I believe will go
a long way in helping to improve the safety and durability of the
Nation's highway bridges. It is with great pleasure we are today
introducing the New Mexico State University Bridge Research Center
Establishment Act of 2005.
The purpose of our bill is to authorize the Secretary of
Transportation to establish a new University Transportation Center
focused on the safety of highway bridges. The new center will lead the
Nation in the research and development of technologies for bridge
testing and monitoring, procedures for ensuring bridge safety and
security, and training in methods of bridge inspection. New Mexico
State University is one of the Nation's leaders in bridge research and
I believe worthy of being designated as one of the Nation's university
transportation centers.
Our highway network is a central component of our economy and
fundamental to our freedom and quality of life. America's mobility is
the engine of our free market system. Transportation via cars, buses,
and trucks plays a central role in our basic quality of life. Much of
the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the materials for our homes and
offices, comes to us over the 4 million miles of our road network.
One critical element of our highway network is the highway bridges
that span streams, rivers, and canyons of our cities and rural areas.
Bridges also help traffic flow smoothly by carrying one road over
another.
Most highway bridges are easy to overlook. Notable exceptions are New
England's covered bridges, the new Zakim Charles River Bridge in
Boston, San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge, and the spectacular Rio
Grande Gorge Bridge near Taos, NM. The fact is, according to the
Federal Highway Administration, we have about 590,000 highway bridges
in this country that are more than 20-feet long. The total bridge-deck
area of these 590,000 bridges is an amazing 120 square miles, or
slightly smaller in area than the entire city limits of Albuquerque,
NM, roughly twice the size of the entire District of Columbia, or five
times the area of New York's Manhattan Island. The State of Texas leads
the Nation with almost 49,000 bridges, about ten percent of the total.
Ohio is second with about 28,000 highway bridges.
A little known and disturbing fact about these 590,000 highway
bridges is that nearly 78,000, or 13 percent, are considered to be
structurally deficient according to the most recent statistics from the
FHWA. The percent of structurally deficient bridges varies widely among
the 50 states. For example, this chart shows the top ten states with
the highest percentage of deficient bridges.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent of structurally deficient bridges
State Number of bridges Number of structurally deficient bridges (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oklahoma..................................................... 23,312 7,307 31.3
Rhode Island................................................. 749 193 25.8
Pennsylvania................................................. 22,253 5,464 24.6
Missouri..................................................... 23,791 5,028 21.1
Iowa......................................................... 24,902 5,259 21.1
Mississippi.................................................. 16,838 3,379 20.1
Vermont...................................................... 2,690 484 18.0
South Dakota................................................. 5,961 1,072 18.0
North Dakota................................................. 4,507 803 17.8
Nebraska..................................................... 15,455 2,550 16.5
Michigan..................................................... 10,818 1,764 16.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The source is the FHWA National Bridge Inventory System, December 2004
Florida and Arizona have the lowest percentages of structurally
deficient bridges at less than 3 percent each.
Structurally deficient bridges are a particular concern in rural
areas of our country. According to FHWA's 2002 edition of its
Conditions and Performance Report to Congress, 16 percent or rural
bridges are structurally deficient compared to only 10 percent of urban
bridges. The report estimates the average costs required to maintain
the existing 590,000 highway bridges is $7.3 billion per year.
Another surprising fact about our Nation's highway bridges is their
age. Almost one-third of all highway bridges are more than 50 years
old, and over 10,000 bridges are at least 100 years old. About 4,200 of
these century-old bridges are currently rated as structurally
deficient.
I do believe the number of deficient bridges in this country should
be a concern to all Senators. Ensuring that States and local
communities have the funds they need to help correct these deficient
bridges will be one of my priorities when Congress reauthorizes TEA-21.
However, because there may not be sufficient Federal and State funding
to address all of the deficient bridges, it will be important to
identify the bridges that are most in need of replacement or
rehabilitation.
To ensure the most efficient use of limited resources, Congress
should also address the need for new technologies to help States
monitor the condition of the Nation's 590,000 highway bridges and
determine priorities for repair or replacement. Such monitoring
technologies, or ``smart bridges,'' should be quick, efficient, and not
damage the bridge in any way. I am very pleased that New Mexico State
University is one of the Nation's pioneers in the development of non-
destructive methods of determining the physical condition of highway
bridges. Such smart bridges can record and transmit information on
their current structural condition as well as on the traffic crossing
them. Sensors embedded in the concrete monitor the stresses on the
bridge as the weather changes or under the weight of vehicles and show
how the materials change with age. The information can then be used by
engineers to help design more durable and economical bridges.
Eventually NMSU's methods could be used to help design better
buildings.
In 1998, NMSU installed 67 fiber-optic sensors on an existing steel
bridge on Interstate 10 in Las Cruces and converted it into a ``smart
bridge.'' This award-winning project was the first application of
fiber-optic sensors to highway bridges. In 2000, sensors were
incorporated directly in a concrete bridge during construction to
monitor the curing of the concrete; the bridge crosses the Rio Puerco
on Interstate 40, west of Albuquerque. A third smart bridge, on I10
over University Avenue in Las Cruces, opened in July 2004.
In February 2003 I had an opportunity to tour the facilities at NMSU
and to see firsthand the fine facilities and work being conducted on
bridge technology. NMSU has an actual 40-foot ``bridge'' in a
laboratory on campus to allow studies of instrumentation and data
collection.
I will ask unanimous consent that two recent articles describing
NMSU's accomplishments on smart bridge technology be printed in the
Record at the end of my statement.
New Mexico State is also a leader in other areas of bridge
inspection. The university has provided training for bridge inspectors
for over 30 years. It has also developed expertise in using a virtual
reality approach to document a bridge's physical condition.
This is just a glimpse at the high quality bridge research at New
Mexico Sate University. The university is widely recognized as national
leader in
[[Page S4403]]
all aspects of bridge research and technology. I believe it is fully
appropriate for NMSU to be recognized as the university technology
bridge research center.
The bill we are introducing today authorizes the Secretary of
Transportation to establish and operate the New Mexico State University
Bridge Research Center. I do believe NMSU has earned this honor. The
bill mirrors the language for University Transportation Centers in the
Senate-passed SAFETEA from the 108th Congress and provides $40 million
in funding over 6 years from the Highway Trust Fund to operate the
bridge technology center.
The Federal Highway Administration has long recognized the quality of
the work at NMSU and has provided grants to support their outstanding
work. In November 2004, NMSU's bridge center was awarded a $400,000
grant to install fiber-sensors in a new bridge over Interstate 10 in
Dona Ana, NM. The sensors will relay information about the effects of
stress on the bridge long before any signs of aging are visible. This
is the fourth bridge in New Mexico to be equipped with the smart bridge
technology. NMSU's Dr. Rola Idriss is the principal investigator of
these projects.
NMSU's work is also being recognized internationally. Highway
departments in Switzerland, Belgium, and Japan are experimenting with
the smart bridge technology. In October 2004, NMSU's Dr. David Jauregui
and Dr. Ken White were invited speakers for the International
Conference on Bridge Inspection and Bridge Management in Beijing,
China. Dr. White delivered the keynote address for the conference. NMSU
is currently developing a memorandum of agreement with the Chinese
bridge community to develop a bridge inspection and management training
program.
Congress has also already recognized the fine work at NMSU. For
example, at my request, Congress provided $600,000 in 2001 for bridge
research at New Mexico State University, $250,000 in 2003, $500,000 in
2004 and $125,000 for the current fiscal year.
The specific purpose of NMSU's Bridge Research Center will be to
contribute to improving the performance of the Nation's highway
bridges. The center will emphasize five goals: 1. Increasing the number
of skilled individuals entering the field of transportation; 2.
Improving the monitoring of the structural health of highway bridges;
3. Developing innovative technologies for testing and assessment of
bridges; 4. Developing technologies and procedures for ensuring bridge
safety, reliability, and security; and 5. Providing training in the
methods of bridge inspection and evaluation.
Building on NMSU's research work, the University Technology Center
will develop a strong educational component, including degree
opportunities in bridge engineering at both the undergraduate and
graduate levels. In addition, the center will have a cooperative
certificate program for training and professional development. Distance
education technology and computer-based learning will allow programs to
be offered at any of the universities.
The engineers at New Mexico State University have applied their vast
talents, tools, and techniques to solving technological problems with
highway bridges for over 30 years. The team is well established and
maintains cutting-edge expertise. The members of the team are
recognized and respected at the national and international levels
through accomplishments in bridge testing, monitoring, and evaluation.
I ask all senators to support the designation of the New Mexico State
University Bridge Research Center. I look forward to working this year
with the Chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee,
Senator Inhofe, and Senator Jeffords, the ranking member, to
incorporate this bill into the full 6-year reauthorization of the
transportation bill.
I now ask unanimous consent that the letters to which I referred be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Albuquerque Journal, Mar. 1, 2004]
NMSU Designs High-Tech Beams To Monitor Soundness of Structure
(By Andrew Webb)
What if a highway bridge could actually tell you it was
wearing out? Or, how about a building that could warn its
owners of unseen structural damage after an earthquake?
That's what researchers from New Mexico State University
hope to produce by embedding high-tech optical sensors in
concrete beams. The six 90-ton beams, each with 120 sensors,
will support the westbound lanes of the Interstate 10
overpass at University Avenue in Las Cruces, expected to be
completed in July.
When the bridge is complete, the sensors will give federal
and state highway departments feedback about the performance
of its design, the new high-performance concrete it is made
of, and its structural soundness as it ages, says NMSU
professor of civil engineering Rola Idriss.
``We'll get information on how the bridge carries its load
throughout its entire life,'' said Idriss. She was in
Albuquerque last week to help supervise the placement of the
sensors and fiber-optic lines in molds at an Albuquerque
construction materials business.
The bridge will be the first of its kind in the country,
Idriss says. NMSU embedded similar sensors, which are
manufactured by the Swiss flrm Smartec, in a much smaller
Interstate 40 bridge over the Rio Puerco west of Albuquerque
in 2000.
``That research was very promising, so we're taking what we
learned on that bridge and putting it on a much larger
Interstate bridge,'' says Jimmy Camp, a state bridge engineer
with the New Mexico Department of Transportation, which
helped fund the $500,000 sensor project along with the
Federal Highway Administration.
The total cost of the Las Cruces project, which began last
summer, is about $6.3 million.
As the expected lifespan of concrete bridges has gone from
about 50 years in the Interstate system's early days to
nearly 80, builders are seeking better data on bridge
conditions, Camp says.
``We make a lot of assumptions with bridge theory,'' he
says.
OPTIC MONITORS
The project entails stringing fiber-optic lines throughout
the concrete, through which beams of light are shot. As the
beam strains or stretches, the properties of the light
change. Those changes are picked up by sensors and relayed to
a data collection box near the bridge for eventual analysis
by NMSU, which then will give the information to the highway
department, Idriss said.
``Those changes can be calibrated to measure the strain,''
she said.
At present, inspection of bridges and other concrete
structures is done primarily by visual analysis and
electronic sensors on outside surfaces.
``Here, you're actually getting measurements from within,''
Idriss said, adding that the added costs would be
insignificant in large projects.
She said she thinks the technology could be applied to
other structures, such as buildings.
``It could become an industry standard,'' she said. ``Right
now, it's still in its infancy.''
Highway departments in Switzerland, Belgium and Japan are
experimenting with similar technology, she said. About 20 of
the 560,000 major highway bridges in the U.S. have some sort
of onboard sensors to detect changes, vibration and other
factors, according to the Federal Highway Administration.
The beams were cast at Albuquerque-based Rinker Prestress,
a division of Florida-based Rinker Materials, which employs
75 people at three New Mexico plants.
____
[From the Associated Press, Oct. 4, 2004]
Interstate 10 Bridge To Provide How Bridges Age
Las Cruces, N.M.--Sensors monitoring stresses on an
Interstate 10 bridge will give researchers information on how
materials age.
New Mexico State University tested the technology earlier
on a bridge over the Rio Puerco near Albuquerque. It
installed the technology in late summer in the I-10 bridge in
Las Cruces.
The idea is that the bridge will provide information for
researchers on how to build bridges with high-performance
concretes, which could save highway departments money in the
future, said Wil Dooley, bridge engineer for the Federal
Highway Administration's state division.
Inside the bridge's beams are fiber optic sensors that
monitor how each component bends and changes in different
weather and with varying weights of vehicles.
The sensors carry data from the bridge to a locker-size box
near an off ramp, where NMSU scientists download the data
each week to a portable computer.
``These newer concretes are more durable and they're going
to last longer,'' Dooley said. ``All our calculations for how
to build bridges are made on traditional concrete. Studying
new concretes in the smart bridge will help us modify those
equations and make new bridges that last longer and cost less
to build.''
NMSU researchers embedded 120 optical sensors in each of
six 90-ton concrete beams in the I-10 overpass. Beams of
light are carried by fiber optic lines laced through the
beams. As the beam strains or stretches, the properties of
the light change.
New Mexico is an ideal location to test stresses on
different types of concrete. Hot days and cold nights cause
concrete to bend and flex, and that happens more in New
Mexico than in many other states, Dooley said.
[[Page S4404]]
Rola Idriss, an NMSU civil engineering professor who is
developing the smart bridge technology, said the researchers
could download information from the sensors remotely, but the
I-10 bridge is close to campus.
In the future, when the technology is put into bridges in
rural areas, highway departments could monitor them
remotely--even monitoring all the bridges in the state from
one location, she said.
``This is a trend to the future,'' Idriss said. ``The
bridge can give you real data about how things are aging. We
can use that data to fix problems early and design better
bridges with fewer problems in the future.''
Highway engineers intend to put the technology next into a
bridge on U.S. 70 near White Sands National Monument.
That might be ideal for testing remote monitoring systems,
Idriss said.
Dooley said the technology also could be used in large
projects to sense corrosion and allow problems to be
corrected before a catastrophic failure, Dooley said.
Adding sensors does not add much expense. The I-10 bridge
cost $6.2 million; the sensors and monitoring equipment,
along with the expense of studying the data, ran $500,000
more, with the money coming from the Federal Highway
Administration and state Department of Transportation, Idriss
said.
``We're basically proving out the technology for them,''
she said. ``The information we gather feeds right back to
them. They tell us what they want and we research it.''
______
By Mr. ALLARD (for himself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Lott, and Mr. Durbin):
S. 914. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a
competitive grant program to build capacity in veterinary medical
education and expand the workforce of veterinarians engaged in public
health practice and biomedical research; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, April 27, 2005, marks an important day for
health care, especially personnel involved in public health
specialties, because it is the day that I introduced the Veterinary
Workforce Expansion Act, VWEA. This bill will create a new competitive
grant program in the Department of Health and Human Services for
capital improvements to the Nation's veterinary medical colleges.
Many Americans do not realize that veterinarians are essential for
early detection and response to unusual disease events that could be
linked to newly emerging infectious diseases such as monkeypox, SARS,
and West Nile Virus, just to name a few. The training and education
that veterinarians receive prepares them to address the concerns of
bioterrorism and emerging infectious diseases, most of which are
transmitted from animals to man. In fact, 80 percent of biothreat
agents of concern fall into this category. I believe veterinarians
should be our first-responders when it comes to these threats. I know
that they are uniquely qualified to address these issues because I have
received this training myself. I received my DVM from Colorado State
University and have kept my license current every year since I closed
my clinic and ran for elected office.
Veterinarians are a unique national resource, as they are the only
health professionals trained in multi-species comparative medicine. As
a result of this training, the veterinary profession is able to provide
an extraordinary link between agriculture and human medicine. The uses
made of this link have been extensive, with multiple benefits to
society.
Currently, approximately 20 percent, 15,000, of all veterinarians in
the United States are I engaged in either private population-health
practice with a significant food animal component or public practice in
one of its various forms. The need for new graduates entering the field
is imperative to preparing the country for the threats of agroterrorism
and bioterrorism. If new graduates do not enter these fields,
government, nongovernmental organizations, industry, and agribusiness
will employ lesser qualified individuals to fill their needs.
There is a critical shortage of veterinarians working in public
health areas. The Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S.
Department of Agriculture, U.S. Public Health Service, veterinary
academia, National Research Council, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics
are unified in reporting that the shortage of veterinarians in the
workforce will only continue to worsen. Combined with a rapidly growing
population and increased human to animal interaction, there is an
urgent need to adequately prepare the Nation's veterinary colleges so
they may educate the workforce of the future.
The VWEA would allow credentialed schools of veterinary medicine to
compete for Federal grant funding under the Department of Health and
Human Services. These grants would be for capital costs associated with
expanding the existing schools of veterinary medicine or their academic
programs in the areas of public health practice. This new grant program
will be authorized for 10 fiscal years. At that point, it is my hope
and goal that the veterinary medical colleges will be adequately
prepared to educate the veterinary workforce for the future.
For more than 100 years, veterinary medical colleges have effectively
delivered a core educational program that has enabled veterinarians to
adapt and respond to evolving societal needs. Being a veterinarian
myself, I want to continue this tradition by expanding existing
veterinary colleges. I hope that you will join me in my efforts to
protect the Nation's public health by providing much-needed support for
veterinary medical education.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself and Mr. Ensign):
S. 916. A bill to provide for the release of certain land from the
Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area in the State of Nevada and to grant
a right-of-way across the released land for the construction and
maintenance of a flood control project; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Orchard
Detention Basin Flood Control Act for myself and Senator Ensign. This
Act will release approximately 65 acres of land managed by the Bureau
of Land Management in Clark County, NV; from the Sunrise Mountain
Instant Study Area to allow the construction of an important flood
control project.
The Orchard Detention Basin project is part of the Clark County
Regional Flood Control District's Master Plan to protect the Las Vegas
Valley from flooding. This comprehensive floodplain management program
is designed to protect private and public lands from flood damage and
to save lives in this rapidly growing metropolitan area. When
completed, the Orchard Detention Basin project will protect
approximately 1,800 acres of urban development from flooding and reduce
the magnitude of flooding further downstream.
The boundary change executed by this legislation is needed because a
portion of the detention basin project lies within the boundaries of
the Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area. An ``instant study area''
designation places development restrictions on public lands similar to
those on wilderness study areas. This designation currently prevents
the construction of this important flood control project, leaving the
land and residents living downstream vulnerable to flood damage.
Even though the Las Vegas Valley is a desert, flash flooding is an
all too common problem affecting the people in Las Vegas. Along with
property damage and deaths related to flooding, Clark County residents
experience inconvenience resulting from impassable roads during
flooding events. Support services such as police, fire and ambulance
can also be delayed, creating life-threatening incidents.
I look forward to working with the Energy Committee and my other
distinguished friends to move this bill in a timely manner during the
current session.
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. 916
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 ``Orchard Detention Basin
Flood Control Act''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) County.--The term ``County'' means Clark County,
Nevada.
(2) Map.--The term ``map'' means the map entitled ``Orchard
Detention Basin'' and dated March 18, 2005.
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
[[Page S4405]]
SEC. 3. RELEASE OF CERTAIN LAND IN THE SUNRISE MOUNTAIN
INSTANT STUDY AREA.
(a) Finding.--Congress finds that the land described in
subsection (c) has been adequately studied for wilderness
designation under section 603 of the Federal Land Policy and
Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782).
(b) Release.--The land described in subsection (c)--
(1) is no longer subject to section 603(c) of the Federal
Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1782(c));
and
(2) shall be managed in accordance with--
(A) land management plans adopted under section 202 of that
Act (43 U.S.C. 1712); and
(B) cooperative conservation agreements in existence on the
date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Description of Land.--The land referred to in
subsections (a) and (b) is the approximately 65 acres of land
in the Sunrise Mountain Instant Study Area of the County that
is--
(1) known as the ``Orchard Detention Basin''; and
(2) designated for release on the map.
(d) Right-of-way.--The Secretary shall grant to the County
a right-of-way to the land described in subsection (c) for
the construction and maintenance of the Orchard Detention
Basin Project on the land.
______
By Mr. AKAKA:
S. 917. A bill to amend title 38; United States Code, to make
permanent the pilot program for direct housing loans for Native
American veterans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, today I rise to offer legislation that
would make the Native American Veteran Housing Loan Pilot Program
permanent. In April 1992, I sponsored a bill that established the
Native American Veteran Housing Loan Pilot Program. That bill later
became Public Law 102-547 and authorized the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) to establish a pilot program that would provide veterans
with assistance in purchasing, constructing, and improving homes
through 1997. This pilot program has been extended several times. In
fact, last Session Congress extended this pilot program by three years.
Through January of this year, 443 loans were created under this
program. It is time to make this program permanent.
The Native American home ownership rate is about half the rate of the
general U.S. population. This issue partially stems from the fact that
lenders generally require that buyers own the parcel of land on which
their homes will be located. This is difficult for many in Indian
Country, Alaska, and Hawaii because their homes are on trust lands.
Most lenders decline these loan applications because Federal law
prohibits a lender from taking possession of Native trust lands in the
event of a default. Several Federal programs have been developed to
provide home ownership opportunities to Native Americans. The Native
American Veteran Housing Loan Program is one such program that has
helped to make home ownership a reality for indigenous peoples,
particularly Native Hawaiians.
Under this program, VA offers loan guaranties that protect lenders
against loss up to the amount of the guaranty if the borrower fails to
repay the loan. Previous to the Native American Veteran Housing Loan
Program, Native American veterans who resided on these lands were
unable to qualify for VA home-loan benefits. With the Native American
Veteran Housing Loan Program, indigenous peoples residing on trust
lands are now able to use this very important VA benefit.
The Native American Veteran Housing Loan Program is intended to serve
veterans who are eligible for homes under the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act, and who reside on Pacific Islands lands that have been communally
owned by cultural tradition and on Native American trust lands on the
continental United States. This VA-administered program assists Native
American veterans by providing them direct loans to build or purchase
homes on such lands.
Before VA can make a loan on tribal trust land, the tribe must enter
into a Memorandum of Understanding with VA to clarify some of the
issues that could arise when administering the program. During fiscal
year 2004, VA entered into two Memoranda of Understanding with tribal
entities. In addition, VA is currently negotiating nine Memoranda of
Understanding with Native American tribes. Trust lands that are
eligible for this program include tribally and individually held
trusts. Per a Memorandum of Understanding between VA and the Bureau of
Indian Affairs (BIA), VA and BIA Regional Offices work to implement
this loan program together. Additionally, VA personnel continue to
conduct outreach with tribal representatives to solicit assistance in
reaching out to tribal members who are veterans.
Per capita, Native Americans have the highest percentage of people
serving in the United States Armed Forces. While they represent less
that 1 percent of the population, they make up 1.6 percent of the Armed
Forces. I want to reiterate that through January of 2005, 443 loans
have been made to Native Americans under this program. This allows
those who have served our nation so honorably and their families to be
a part of the American Dream of home ownership. We need to make the
Native American Veteran Housing Loan permanent 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. 917
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PERMANENT AUTHORITY FOR HOUSING LOANS FOR NATIVE
AMERICAN VETERANS.
(a) Permanent Authority.--Section 3761 of title 38, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 3761. Authority for housing loans for Native American
veterans
``(a) The Secretary shall make direct housing loans to
Native American veterans in accordance with the provisions of
this subchapter.
``(b) The purpose of loans under this subchapter is to
permit Native American veterans to purchase, construct, or
improve dwellings on trust land.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 3762 of such title is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``under this
subchapter'' after ``Native American veteran'' in the matter
preceding paragraph (1);
(2) in subsection (b)(1)(E), by striking ``in order to
ensure'' and all that follows and inserting a period;
(3) in subsection (c)(1)(B), by striking ``shall be the
amount'' and all that follows in the second sentence and
inserting ``shall be such amount as the Secretary considers
appropriate for the purpose of this subchapter.'';
(4) in subsection (d)(1), by striking the second sentence;
(5) in subsection (i)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``of the pilot program''
and all that follows and inserting ``of the availability of
direct housing loans for Native American veterans under this
subchapter.''; and
(B) in paragraph (2)--
(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``under the pilot
program'' and all that follows and inserting ``under this
subchapter'';
(ii) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``in participating in
the pilot program'' and inserting ``in participating in the
making of direct loans under this subchapter''; and
(6) by striking subsection (j).
(c) Clerical Amendments.--(1) The heading of subchapter V
of chapter 37 of such title is amended to read as follows:
``SUBCHAPTER V--HOUSING LOANS FOR NATIVE AMERICAN VETERANS''.
(2) The table of contents for such chapter is amended--
(A) by striking the matter relating to the subchapter
heading of subchapter V and inserting the following new item:
``Subchapter V--Housing Loans for Native American Veterans'';
and
(B) by striking the item relating to section 3761 and
inserting the following new item:
``3761. Authority for housing loans for Native American veterans.''.
______
By Mr. OBAMA (for himself, Mr. Talent, and Mr. Durbin):
S. 918. A bill to provide for Flexible Fuel Vehicle (FFV) refueling
capability at new and existing refueling station facilities to promote
energy security and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, we have all heard from folks back home
about the high price of gasoline. When you pull into a gas station to
fill up your tank, you're now paying some of the highest prices of all
time.
And when you turn on the news, you see that our dependence on foreign
oil keeps us tied to one of the most dangerous and unstable regions in
the world. With oil at more than $50 per barrel, some argue that the
best way to deal with high gasoline prices is to wait it out--to wait
until the world market dynamics change.
[[Page S4406]]
I disagree with that mindset. For too long now, we've relied too
heavily on foreign oil to fuel our energy needs in this country. This
is not good for the United States--not for our economy, not for our
national security, and not for our people.
The bill I am introducing today, along with my distinguished
colleagues from Illinois and Missouri, is designed to do something
about fuel prices and our reliance on foreign oil--something rooted in
reality, something achievable in the short term, and something that
actually works.
Last week, I visited a gasoline station in Springfield, IL, where
along with regular gasoline, a new kind of fuel is offered for
consumers--a fuel known as E-85. E-85 is a clean, alternative form of
transportation fuel consisting of a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15
percent gasoline. Ethanol is made from renewable, Midwestern corn, and
it is 40-60 cents cheaper per gallon than standard gasoline. Last week,
at this Springfield station, regular gasoline was listed at $2.06 and
E-85 was selling for $1.69.
Not every car can run on E-85 fuel--but there are millions of cars
that can. They're known as ``flexible-fuel vehicles,'' and the auto
industry is turning out hundreds of thousands of them every year. And
if any of you are wondering whether cars will run as well on E-85 as
they would on regular gas, just ask the Indy 500, which recently
announced that all of their cars will soon run on E-85 fuel.
The only problem we have now is that we're in short supply of E-85
stations. While there are more than 180,000 gas stations all over
America, there are only about 400 E-85 stations. And although E-85 has
many environmental benefits and is a higher performing fuel, the fuel
economy of E-85 is slightly lower than that of regular gasoline. An
additional incentive is needed to help ensure that the cost of this
clean fuel remains competitive with that of regular gasoline.
That is why I'm introducing a bill to provide a tax credit of 50% for
building an E-85 fuel station and a tax credit of 35 cents per gallon
of E-85 fuel. This provision is similar to a provision that already has
passed the Senate three times. I hope my colleagues will pass this
provision again.
We've talked for too long about energy independence in this country,
and I think this bill gives us an opportunity to actually get something
done about it. I urge the support of my colleagues of this bill, and I
thank the Chair.
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. 918
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE, ETC.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``E-85 Fuel
Utilization and Infrastructure Development Incentives Act of
2005''.
(b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly
provided, whenever in this division 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.
(c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title, etc.
Sec. 2. Purpose.
Sec. 3. Findings.
Sec. 4. Incentives for the installation of alternative fuel refueling
stations.
Sec. 5. Incentives for the retail sale of alternative fuels as motor
vehicle fuel.
SEC. 2. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Act is to decrease the dependence of
the United States on foreign oil by increasing the use of
high ratio blends of gasoline with a minimum 85 percent
domestically derived ethanol content (E-85) as an alternative
fuel and providing greater access to this fuel for American
motorists.
SEC. 3. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) The growing United States reliance on foreign produced
petroleum and the recent escalation of crude oil prices
demands that all prudent measures be undertaken to increase
United States refining capacity, domestic oil production, and
expanded utilization of alternative forms of transportation
fuels and infrastructure.
(2) Recent studies confirm the environmental and overall
energy security benefits of high ratio blends of gasoline
with a minimum 85 percent domestically derived ethanol
content (E-85), especially with regard to the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions from the national on-road passenger
car vehicle fleet.
(3) The market penetration of E-85 capable Flexible Fuel
Vehicles (FFVs) now exceeds 5,000,000 with an additional
1,000,000 or more FFVs expected to be added annually as
automakers continue to respond positively to congressionally
provided production incentives.
(4) It is further recognized that actual implementation of
the use of E-85 fuel has been significantly underutilized due
primarily to the lack of E-85 refueling infrastructure
availability and promotion and that such utilization rate
will continue to lag unless resources are provided to
substantially accelerate national refueling infrastructure
development.
(5) Additionally, incentives in the form of tax credits can
serve to stimulate infrastructure development and E-85 fuel
utilization.
SEC. 4. INCENTIVES FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL
REFUELING STATIONS.
(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 new section:
``SEC. 30B. ALTERNATIVE FUEL VEHICLE REFUELING PROPERTY
CREDIT.
``(a) Credit Allowed.--There shall be allowed as a credit
against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year
an amount equal to 50 percent of the amount paid or incurred
by the taxpayer during the taxable year for the installation
of qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property.
``(b) Limitation.--
``(1) In general.--The credit allowed under subsection
(a)--
``(A) with respect to any retail alternative fuel vehicle
refueling property, shall not exceed $30,000, and
``(B) with respect to any residential alternative fuel
vehicle refueling property, shall not exceed $1,000.
``(2) Phaseout.--
``(A) In general.--In the case of any qualified alternative
fuel vehicle refueling property placed in service after
December 31, 2010, the limit otherwise applicable under
paragraph (1) shall be reduced by--
``(i) 25 percent in the case of any alternative fuel
vehicle refueling property placed in service in calendar year
2011, and
``(ii) 50 percent in the case of any alternative fuel
vehicle refueling property placed in service in calendar year
2012.
``(c) Year Credit Allowed.--The credit allowed under
subsection (a) shall be allowed in the taxable year in which
the qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property is
placed in service by the taxpayer.
``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling
property.--The term `qualified alternative fuel vehicle
refueling property' has the same meaning given for clean-fuel
vehicle refueling property by section 179A(d), but only with
respect to any fuel at least 85 percent of the volume of
which consists of ethanol.
``(2) Residential alternative fuel vehicle refueling
property.--The term `residential alternative fuel vehicle
refueling property' means qualified alternative fuel vehicle
refueling property which is installed on property which is
used as the principal residence (within the meaning of
section 121) of the taxpayer.
``(3) Retail alternative fuel vehicle refueling property.--
The term `retail alternative fuel vehicle refueling property'
means qualified alternative fuel vehicle refueling property
which is installed on property (other than property described
in paragraph (2)) used in a trade or business of the
taxpayer.
``(e) Application With Other Credits.--The credit allowed
under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not exceed
the excess (if any) of--
``(1) the regular tax for the taxable year reduced by the
sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and sections 27,
29, and 30, over
``(2) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable year.
``(f) Basis Reduction.--For purposes of this title, the
basis of any property shall be reduced by the portion of the
cost of such property taken into account under subsection
(a).
``(g) No Double Benefit.--No deduction shall be allowed
under section 179A with respect to any property with respect
to which a credit is allowed under subsection (a).
``(h) Refueling Property Installed for Tax-exempt
Entities.--In the case of qualified alternative fuel vehicle
refueling property installed on property owned or used by an
entity exempt from tax under this chapter, the person which
installs such refueling property for the entity shall be
treated as the taxpayer with respect to the refueling
property for purposes of this section (and such refueling
property shall be treated as retail alternative fuel vehicle
refueling property) and the credit shall be allowed to such
person, but only if the person clearly discloses to the
entity in any installation contract the specific amount of
the credit allowable under this section.
``(i) Carryforward Allowed.--
``(1) In general.--If the credit amount allowable under
subsection (a) for a taxable year exceeds the amount of the
limitation under subsection (e) for such taxable year
[[Page S4407]]
(referred to as the `unused credit year' in this subsection),
such excess shall be allowed as a credit carryforward for
each of the 20 taxable years following the unused credit
year.
``(2) Rules.--Rules similar to the rules of section 39
shall apply with respect to the credit carryforward under
paragraph (1).
``(j) Special Rules.--Rules similar to the rules of
paragraphs (4) and (5) of section 179A(e) shall apply.
``(k) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as necessary to carry out the provisions of this
section.
``(l) Termination.--This section shall not apply to any
property placed in service after December 31, 2013.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Section 1016(a) is amended by striking ``and'' at the
end of paragraph (30), by striking the period at the end of
paragraph (31) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
``(32) to the extent provided in section 30B(f).''.
(2) Section 55(c)(2) is amended by inserting ``30B(e),''
after ``30(b)(3),''.
(3) 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 new item:
``Sec. 30B. Alternative fuel vehicle refueling property 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.
SEC. 5. INCENTIVES FOR THE RETAIL SALE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS
AS MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL.
(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 40A the following new section:
``SEC. 40B. CREDIT FOR RETAIL SALE OF ALTERNATIVE FUELS AS
MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL.
``(a) General Rule.--The alternative fuel retail sales
credit for any taxable year is 35 cents for each gallon of
alternative fuel sold at retail by the taxpayer during such
year.
``(b) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
``(1) Alternative fuel.--The term `alternative fuel' means
any fuel at least 85 percent of the volume of which consists
of ethanol.
``(2) Sold at retail.--
``(A) In general.--The term `sold at retail' means the
sale, for a purpose other than resale, after manufacture,
production, or importation.
``(B) Use treated as sale.--If any person uses alternative
fuel (including any use after importation) as a fuel to
propel any qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle (as
defined in this section) before such fuel is sold at retail,
then such use shall be treated in the same manner as if such
fuel were sold at retail as a fuel to propel such a vehicle
by such person.
``(3) Qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle.--The term
`new qualified alternative fuel motor vehicle' means any
motor vehicle--
``(A) which is capable of operating on an alternative fuel,
``(B) the original use of which commences with the
taxpayer,
``(C) which is acquired by the taxpayer for use or lease,
but not for resale, and
``(D) which is made by a manufacturer.
``(c) Election To Pass Credit.--A person which sells
alternative fuel at retail may elect to pass the credit
allowable under this section to the purchaser of such fuel
or, in the event the purchaser is a tax-exempt entity or
otherwise declines to accept such credit, to the person which
supplied such fuel, under rules established by the Secretary.
``(d) 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
fuel sold at retail after December 31, 2010.''.
(b) Credit Treated as Business Credit.--Section 38(b)
(relating to current year business credit) is amended by
striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (18), by striking
the period at the end of paragraph (19) and inserting ``,
plus'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(20) the alternative fuel retail sales credit determined
under section 40B(a).''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 40A the
following new item:
``Sec. 40B. Credit for retail sale of alternative fuels as motor
vehicle fuel.''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to fuel sold at retail after the date of the
enactment of this Act, in taxable years ending after such
date.
______
By Mr. BURNS (for himself, Mr. Rockefeller, Mr. Dorgan, Mr.
Craig, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Johnson, Mr.
Baucus, and Mr. Coleman):
S. 919. A bill to amend title 49, United States Code, to enhance
competition among and between rail carriers in order to ensure
efficient rail service and reasonable rail rates, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, as the Senate begins the important task of
debating the highway bill reauthorization, another critical
infrastructure issue comes to mind: railroads. In Montana, we rely
heavily on both passenger and freight rail for our transportation
needs. However, Montana is served by only one major railroad, resulting
in shippers being captive to little or no competition for price or
service quality. That lack of competition hurts our competitiveness for
agriculture and manufacturing. It drives up the cost of electricity,
because of the increased costs for coal. Sometimes, it even costs us
jobs in Montana.
To address the problems faced by many captive shippers, I am
introducing today the Railroad Competition Act of 2005. I am joined by
my colleagues, Senators Rockefeller, Dorgan, Craig, Dayton, Vitter,
Thune, Johnson, Baucus, and Coleman. This legislation will extend
competition to many captive rail customers and correct problems in the
Surface Transportation Board's implementation of railroad deregulation.
Specifically, the legislation ensures that rail customers will receive
rate quotes for movements between various points on a railroad's
system; frees regional and short line railroads to provide access to
additional major systems; provides captive rail customers who cannot
afford to participate in expensive rate challenge proceedings access to
arbitration; and directs the STB to adopt a more realistic and workable
rate reasonableness standard.
In addition to a lack of competition in many markets, the rail
industry in America is badly in need of investment into its
infrastructure. To address the infrastructure problem, the legislation
increases ten-fold the current Railroad Rehabilitation and
Infrastructure Financing program. The legislation also expands who is
eligible for the loans and loan guarantees, so that qualified shipping
entities can also invest in rail infrastructure.
This is about jobs, plain and simple. Last year, when the intermodal
hub in Shelby, Montana was closed, over 40 jobs were lost. The Port
Authority in Shelby reached out to the railroads to persuade them to
keep the hub open, but without competition, the single supplier chose
to close. Those jobs are real losses in Shelby, a town of a little over
3,000 people. As high rail rates make U.S. products less competitive,
imports flow in to fill the gap--and that costs us jobs. I understand
that the rail industry employs a lot of people, and I am glad for those
jobs. But we can not let lack of choice and competition in price and
service cost us jobs in other areas.
Since passage of the Staggers Act in 1980, the railroad industry has
experienced significant consolidation, from over 40 major railroads
down to 7. Roughly 35 percent of the rail traffic in America is
captive, driving up the cost of transportation and placing a heavy
burden on shippers.
Captive shippers, like my farmers in Montana, have nowhere to go to
seek relief. The Surface Transportation Board, the watchdogs over the
rail system, is a complicated and expensive mess that hardly provides a
fair forum for disputes. To bring a rate reasonableness case,
challenging the unfair rates charged to captive shippers, a rail
customer must first file huge fees--fees that will double in the coming
weeks. Then, the customer must construct a hypothetical railroad and
prove to the STB that rail transportation theoretically can be provided
at a lower fee. That process can cost over $2 million per case, and
take years to see through. At the end, even if the shipper wins, all he
gets is a lower fee in the future. Too often, damages for past
overcharging are not awarded. Meanwhile, the railroad sits idly by,
under no obligation to justify its rates, and continues to collect the
exorbitant fees that are under dispute. This system can not stand.
The Railroad Competition Act of 2005 directs the STB to address this
nonsensical system, and develops a final offer arbitration option,
allowing shippers to take their case to a neutral arbiter. These
provisions are necessary, not to
[[Page S4408]]
punish railroads, but to develop a level playing field that keeps my
small businesses and agriculture producers in business.
Railroads are an essential part of our nation's infrastructure, a
vast system that includes our highways, railroads, electric
transmission lines, pipelines, and digital infrastructure. In a rural
state like Montana, we rely on the rails to cover long distances
efficiently, so rail must remain a viable shipping option. We need to
achieve affordability, while still allowing sustainability for the
railroads. There is a necessary public interest in our shared
infrastructure, and the Railroad Competition Act of 2005 is designed to
address legitimate public concerns, in Montana and around the nation,
about rail operations. I look forward to working with my colleagues to
secure passage of this important legislation.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to join with
my colleagues Senator Burns, Senator Dorgan, Senator Craig, Senator
Dayton, Senator Vitter, Senator Johnson, Senator Thune, Senator
Coleman, and Senator Baucus to introduce the Railroad Competition Act
of 2005. This legislation encourages the competition and consumer
protection in the freight railroad market that Congress intended when
it partially deregulated the industry in 1980 with the passage of the
Staggers Act.
Introduction of legislation in this vein is a bit of a ritual for
this Senator. West Virginia industries depend on efficient and
dependable rail service at fair prices to move their products to
market. This is a perfectly reasonable goal. However, for shippers
without competitive rail access--referred to as captive shippers--it is
a cruel and impossible dream. I have tried for years, with partners
from both sides of the aisle and all parts of the country, to change
the status quo, and improve the economic situation for rail shippers
and retail shoppers. This is the seventh time since 1985 I have
sponsored legislation to address this issue, and the fifth congress in
a row in which I have worked closely with my good friends Conrad Burns
and Byron Dorgan to help shippers and their customers. And I won't give
up until I actually succeed.
Predictably, the railroads will overreact to this bill with scathing
accusations of what we are doing. In truth, we intend nothing more
radical than helping shippers, consumers, and the railroads themselves,
reap the benefits of the basic principles of capitalism--the ability of
sophisticated actors to conduct arms-length negotiations for
competition, service, and fair prices. Currently, Class I railroads
overcharge and underserve captive shippers with impunity, and with an
antitrust exemption preventing meaningful oversight by Congress.
Customers have no power. This means higher prices for electricity,
food, medicine, paper products; the chemicals to protect our water
supply and crops, and the basic ingredients of the plastics in many of
the goods we purchase. This is crucial to protecting commerce in the
United States. So far, we have been thwarted, though we remain
undeterred in our efforts and confident of the validity of our
objectives.
In the 1970s, Congress observed a bloated freight rail network,
unprofitable railroads, and service was anything but efficient and
dependable. When the Staggers Act was passed in 1980, Congress gave a
green light to deregulation of the railroad industry. But, as with the
deregulation of every other industry that Congress has allowed, there
were to be constraints on the ability of railroads to abuse shippers
left captive to just one railroad. The Staggers Act left it to the
Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to watch over a partially
deregulated industry carrying out Staggers' dual goals: Improving the
financial health and viability of the railroads; and improving and
maintaining service for shippers. The ICC was responsible for ensuring
fair treatment and reasonable rates for those shippers made captive by
mergers or business decisions allowed under Staggers.
The success of Staggers has been completely one-sided. Captive rail
shippers in my state of West Virginia have told me--since before I came
to the United States Senate--that service was horrible and rates being
charged were too high. That is still true today. When I was first
running for the Senate, the country was served by about 40 ``Class I''
railroads. After Staggers the railroad industry ``rationalized'' its
routes--meaning it dropped unprofitable lines and left more and more
shippers captive to just one railroad.
A virtually unimpeded string of rail mergers during the last 25 years
has only compounded the problem. The number of Class I railroads has
dropped to seven. Four of these--CSX and Norfolk Southern in the East
and Burlington Northern Santa Fe and the Union Pacific in the West--
completely dominate the industry, accounting for about 90 percent of
the freight rail traffic in the nation.
This is simple. Fewer market participants mean less competition, and
less competition opens up the possibility of the abuse of local
monopoly power. Under the misadministration of the Staggers Act, first
by the ICC, and later by its successor agency the Surface
Transportation Board (STB), abuse of captive shippers has not only
gotten worse, but it has been unjustly bestowed a veneer of propriety
by a series of unwise administrative decisions and at least one court
case that gave grudging deference to an agency, the STB, that has
failed to carry out the clear directions of Congress. The STB, to which
shippers have looked for a solution, has become a facilitator of the
problem.
The goals of the Railroad Competition Act are really quite mundane.
My colleagues and I hope only to give life to a freight rail system
originally envisioned by the drafters of the Staggers Act. We hope to
send to the President a bill that will allow captive shippers the most
basic right in business negotiations: They will be able to get the
railroads that ship their products simply to quote a rate for the
service.
My colleagues may be amazed to find out that the STB's current
reading of the Staggers Act allows shippers no such right. Our
legislation will simply require railroads to tell their customers the
cost of moving a certain quantity of product from their manufacturing
facility to their customer. Point A to Point B. Nothing in business is
more basic, but it is a basic of business negotiations captive shippers
do not currently enjoy. Additionally, our legislation also would do the
following: clarifies that the STB shall promote competition among rail
carriers, helping to maintain both reasonable freight rail rates and
consistent and efficient rail service; creates a system of ``final
offer'' arbitration for matters before the STB; authorizes the STB to
remove so-called ``paper barriers'' that prevent short-line and
regional railroads from providing improved service to shippers;
requires STB to act in the public interest and removes required showing
of railroads' anti-competitive conduct; caps filing fees for STB rate
cases at the level of federal district courts (reducing filing fee from
the current fee $65,000, which is to be doubled in 2005); calls for a
Department of Transportation (DOT) study of rail competition; allows
elected officials and state railroad regulators to petition the STB for
declarations of ``areas of inadequate rail competition,'' with
appropriate remedies; creates position of Rail Customer Advocate at
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA); and expands infrastructure
modernization loan guarantee program.
In closing I would suggest that, rather than the highly charged
arguments we have engaged in over the years, my colleagues encourage
the railroads to take shippers' concerns seriously, and that we all
work to create a freight rail marketplace made up of companies hungry,
in the best capitalist sense of that word, to do business. That is the
goal of the Railroad Competition Act, and I look forward to its
consideration by the full Senate.
______
By Mr. CORNYN:
S. 920. A bill to amend chapter 1 of title 3, United States Code,
relating to Presidential succession; to the Committee on Rules and
Administration.
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill I am
introducing today--to amend chapter 1 of title 3, United States Code,
relating to Presidential succession--be printed in the Record. I also
ask unanimous consent that the section by section analysis titled
``Presidential Succession Act of 2005'' and the letter sent to the
chairmen of the RNC and DNC be printed in the Record.
[[Page S4409]]
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
S. 920
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 ``Presidential Succession Act
of 2005''.
SEC. 2. PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION.
(a) In General.--Section 19(d) of title 3, United States
Code, is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``, Secretary of
Homeland Security, Ambassador to the United Nations,
Ambassador to Great Britain, Ambassador to Russia, Ambassador
to China, Ambassador to France'' after ``Secretary of
Veterans Affairs'';
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking ``but not'' and all that
follows through the period and inserting ``or until the
disability of the President or Vice President is removed.'';
(3) in paragraph (3)--
(A) by striking ``be held to constitute'' and inserting
``not require''; and
(B) by adding at the end the following: ``Such individual
shall not receive compensation from holding that office
during the period that the individual acts as President under
this section, and shall be compensated for that period as
provided under subsection (c).''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) This subsection shall apply only to such officers
that are--
``(A) eligible to the office of President under the
Constitution;
``(B) appointed to an office listed under paragraph (1), by
and with the advice and consent of the Senate, prior to the
time the powers and duties of the President devolve to such
officer under paragraph (1); and
``(C) not under impeachment by the House of Representatives
at the time the powers and duties of the office of President
devolve upon them.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--Section 19 of title 3, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``as Acting President''
and inserting ``to act as President''; and
(2) in subsection (e)--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``(a), (b), and
(d)'' and inserting ``(a) and (b)''; and
(B) by striking the second sentence.
SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING VOTES BY ELECTORS AFTER
DEATH OR INCAPACITY OF NOMINEES.
It is the sense of Congress that--
(1) during a Presidential election year, the nominees of
each political party for the office of President and Vice
President should jointly announce and designate on or before
the final day of the convention (or related event) at which
they are nominated the individuals for whom the electors of
President and Vice President who are pledged to vote for such
nominees should give their votes for such offices in the
event that such nominees are deceased or permanently
incapacitated prior to the date of the meeting of the
electors of each State under section 7 of title 3, United
States Code;
(2) in the event a nominee for President is deceased or
permanently incapacitated prior to the date referred to in
paragraph (1) (but the nominee for Vice President of the same
political party is not deceased or permanently
incapacitated), the electors of President who are pledged to
vote for the nominee should give their votes to the nominee
of the same political party for the office of Vice President,
and the electors of Vice President who are pledged to vote
for the nominee for Vice President should give their votes to
the individual designated for such office by the nominees
under paragraph (1);
(3) in the event a nominee for Vice President is deceased
or permanently incapacitated prior to the date referred to in
paragraph (1) (but the nominee for President of the same
political party is not deceased or permanently
incapacitated), the electors of Vice President who are
pledged to vote for such nominee should give their votes to
the individual designated for such office by the nominees
under paragraph (1);
(4) in the event that both the nominee for President and
the nominee for Vice President of the same political party
are deceased or permanently incapacitated prior to the date
referred to in paragraph (1), the electors of President and
Vice President who are pledged to vote for such nominees
should vote for the individuals designated for each such
office by the nominees under paragraph (1); and
(5) political parties should establish rules and procedures
consistent with the procedures described in the preceding
paragraphs, including procedures to obtain written pledges
from electors to vote in the manner described in such
paragraphs.
SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT AND
THE SMOOTH TRANSITION OF EXECUTIVE POWER.
It is the sense of Congress that during the period
preceding the end of a term of office in which a President
will not be serving a succeeding term--
(1) that President should consider submitting the
nominations of individuals to the Senate who are selected by
the President-elect for offices that fall within the line of
succession;
(2) the Senate should consider conducting confirmation
proceedings and votes on the nominations described under
paragraph (1), to the extent determined appropriate by the
Senate, between January 3 and January 20 before the
Inauguration; and
(3) that President should consider agreeing to sign and
deliver commissions for all approved nominations on January
20 before the Inauguration to ensure continuity of
Government.
Section-by-Section Analysis
The Presidential Succession Act of 2005--introduced by U.S.
Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) and U.S, Representative Brad
Sherman (D-CA) on April 27, 2005--makes a number of
significant improvements to the current Presidential
Succession Act, in order to ensure the continuity of the
Presidency in the event of a terrorist attack or other
crisis. This legislation implements Article II, Section 1,
Clause 6 of the U.S. Constitution, which provides that ``the
Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death,
Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice
President, declaring what Officer shall then act as
President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the
Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.''
This legislation is a more modest version of two bills
introduced by Senator Cornyn and Representative Sherman in
the last Congress to reform the Presidential Succession Act.
Because many constitutional experts believe that members of
Congress are constitutionally ineligible to serve in the line
of succession, both S. 2073 and H.R. 2749 would have
addressed a potential constitutional crisis by removing the
House Speaker and Senate President pro tempore from the line
of succession. By contrast, the 2005 version of the bill does
not attempt to address that particular controversy, but
instead leaves the Speaker and President pro tempore in the
line of succession. It is hoped that Congress will enact the
Presidential Succession Act of 2005 quickly, and that the
more controversial but nevertheless critical constitutional
issues arising out of current law can be addressed as well
through separate legislation.
Section 1. Short title.
Section 2. Presidential Succession Act reforms.
Amending the line of succession. This provision adds the
Secretary of Homeland Security to the line of succession.
Under current law, the Secretary of Homeland Security does
not fall within the line of succession. During the 108th
Congress, the Senate approved legislation to place the
Secretary of Homeland Security right behind the Attorney
General in the line of succession, but that proposal ran into
opposition in the House. This provision attempts to avoid
that controversy by placing the Secretary of Homeland
Security at the end of the current line of succession.
In addition, this provision addresses the difficulty that
arises from the fact that all current members of the line of
succession generally work and live in the greater Washington,
D.C. area. Due to current law, a catastrophic incident in the
D.C. area could theoretically eliminate the entire line of
succession and leave the nation without anyone legally
eligible to serve as President for an extended period of
time. Accordingly, this provisions adds at the end of line of
succession senior federal officials who do not generally work
and live in the D.C. area specifically, the U.S. Ambassador
to the United Nations and the U.S. Ambassadors to each of the
four other permanent members of the U.N. Security Council
(Great Britain, Russia, China, and France).
Reforming Cabinet succession. This provision eliminates the
requirement that a cabinet secretary must resign in order to
succeed to the Presidency. By doing so, this provision
helps ensure that a cabinet secretary will not hesitate to
take the reins, by ensuring that there will be a cabinet
position to which the officer may return after any period
of service as Acting President. This provision also helps
cure a potential constitutional defect in current law;
some constitutional scholars argue that only a current
``officer'' may act as President under Article II.
In addition, this provision addresses the so-called
``bumping off'' problem in current law. The current
Presidential succession statute puts the Executive Branch in
a precarious position vis-a-vis Congress, because it allows
the House Speaker or Senate President pro tempore to assert
their right under current law to take over the reins at any
time from a cabinet officer who holds office as Acting
President. This aspect of current law raises serious
constitutional separation of powers problems, because it
effectively places the Presidency at the mercy of
Congressional leaders. In addition, current law raises a
potential constitutional problem because Article II, Section
1, Clause 6 of the U.S. Constitution states that any officer
who shall act as President ``shall act accordingly, until the
Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.''
This provision eliminates this ``bumping off'' problem in
current law by eliminating the ability of the House Speaker
or Senate President pro tempore to assert their right under
current law to take over the reins from a cabinet officer
holding office as Acting President.
Finally, this provision ensures that only individuals who
are actually confirmed to the Cabinet-level office are
eligible to serve in the line of succession. By doing so,
this provision prevents lower-level officers who rise to the
position of an acting Cabinet secretary from then acting as
President.
[[Page S4410]]
Section 3. Presidential succession during the Presidential
selection process. This provision states the sense of
Congress that steps must be taken to ensure smooth
Presidential succession in the event of a crisis during the
Presidential selection process. The provision states that,
prior to their political party's nominating conventions,
candidates for President and Vice President should announce
individuals who should be chosen by members of the Electoral
College in the event that either the Presidential or Vice
Presidential nominee is killed or permanently incapacitated
prior to the Electoral College vote. The provision also
advises the political parties to craft rules and procedures
consistent with these principles.
Section 4. Presidential succession during the Presidential
transition. This provision is modeled after S. Con. Res. 89
and H. Res. 775 from the last Congress. It states the sense
of Congress that, in the event of the election of a new
President, the outgoing Administration and incoming
Administration should work together to ensure a smooth
transition. Under current law, in the event of a terrorist
attack on the inauguration or other crisis, a member of the
prior Administration could theoretically rise to serve as
Acting President, because new Cabinet officers may have not
yet been nominated, confirmed, and appointed by that time.
Accordingly, this provision calls for cooperation between
outgoing and incoming Administrations to achieve smooth
Presidential transitions. It recommends that the outgoing
President nominate the individuals selected by the incoming
President for offices that fall within the line of
succession, it advises the Senate to act on those nominees to
the extent it deems appropriate prior to the inaugural event
on January 20, and finally, it recommends that the outgoing
President appoint confirmed individuals to their posts on
January 20 before the inaugural event.
____
Congress of the United States,
Washington, DC, April 27, 2005.
Chairman Ken Mehlman,
Republican National Committee,
Washington, DC.
Chairman Howard Dean,
Democratic National Committee,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Mehlman and Chairman Dean: This morning, we
introduce the Presidential Succession Act of 2005, to update
the existing Presidential Succession Act of 1947. The bill
addresses some of the most pressing problems in the current
law to ensure that, should tragedy strike, the nation will
have a clear and legitimate president.
One of the primary areas of concern is the period between
the nominating conventions and the casting of Electoral.
votes. Should a presidential or vice-presidential nominee be
unable to proceed as a nominee between these two events,
general election voters and electors would face great
uncertainty about their votes. We are concerned about the
potential mischief and instability in our government that
could arise in such event.
We have attached language from the Presidential Succession
act of 2005 which calls on political parties to address this
issue with appropriate party rules changes and public
declarations. Specifically, these changes would call upon the
presidential and vice-presidential nominees to jointly name
successors should tragedy occur. If only the presidential
nominee is unable to continue in an election, the vice
presidential nominee would become the presidential nominee.
There is no reason for the political parties to await
Congressional action. The vagaries of current party rules can
be solved much sooner. We call on you to take action.
Should you have questions or need additional information,
please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
John Cornyn,
United States Senate.
Brad Sherman,
United States House of Representatives.
______
By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Kennedy, and Mrs.
Clinton):
S. 921. A bill to provide for secondary school reform, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce a bill
with Senators Durbin, Kennedy, and Clinton that will help our Nation's
high school students graduate with the knowledge necessary to succeed
in post-secondary education and the skills needed to succeed in the
workforce.
Unfortunately too many high school students today are not completing
high school at all or with the skills necessary to enter post-secondary
education or the workforce. The statistics are staggering. Every day,
3,000 teenagers drop out of high school. This year over 500,000
students will drop out of high school. Overall, less than 70 percent of
high school students will graduate and less than 50 percent of high
school students of color will graduate.
Of 100 9th graders, less than 70 percent will graduate on time, only
38 percent will directly enter college, only 26 percent will still be
enrolled in their sophomore year, and only 18 percent will graduate
from college. That number is even lower for minority students. Forty
percent of students entering 4-year colleges and nearly 70 percent of
students entering community colleges will take remedial classes in
reading, writing or math, extending their years in and the cost of
college.
Only one-third of the U.S. workforce has any post-secondary education
but it is estimated that 60 percent of new jobs in the 21st century
will require a post-secondary education. Business will spend billions
of dollars on remediation for their employees in reading, writing and
math.
We can do better and we must do better for our Nation's students,
their families, and American business. Currently, high school students
are graduating at meager rates and even if they are graduating from
high school, they are not leaving high school with the skills and
knowledge to enter the workforce or be successful in college. That is
why I have written and am introducing the Pathways for All Students to
Succeed Act or the PASS Act.
The PASS Act targets high school reform in three key areas: core
academics, improving graduation rates, and assistance to low-performing
schools to improve student achievement through innovative models. The
PASS Act will help improve student achievement in core academics and
reduce the need for remediation in college and the workplace through
grants for schools to hire literacy and math coaches. Literacy and math
coaches bring professional development back into schools and
classrooms. Coaches help teachers identify which students are having
reading or math problems, how to respond to such problems, and how to
integrate literacy and math skills across curricula.
The PASS Act also targets dropouts and low graduation rates through
grants for academic counselors and a meaningful graduation rate
calculation. Time after time I have talked to students in their senior
year who have said, ``I didn't know I needed four years of math to
graduate and get into college.'' Part of the problem is that our
counselors are completely overwhelmed. The current national average
ratio of students to counselors is over 450 to 1. My bill would provide
grants to bring that ratio down to 150 to 1. Academic counselors will
also work with students and their families to create 6 year graduation
and career plans that will help students identify what classes they
need to graduate and achieve their post-secondary goals, whether those
goals are training or college, and identify support services such as
GEAR UP and TRIO that are available to the student.
The PASS Act also provides grants to schools for data collection, and
specifically on graduation rates. Currently schools do not have a way
to accurately calculate graduation rates. The Department of Education
only requires schools to report the graduation rate based on 12th grade
data and we all know that is not when students drop out. The PASS Act
provides schools with funding to collect, disaggregate, and report
accurate graduation rates so that schools can correctly diagnose and
address problems facing specific student populations.
And lastly the PASS Act provides additional funding for schools
labeled ``in need of improvement'' to implement proven, innovative
reforms leading to gains in student achievement. I often talk to
principals who tell me they know what they need to do to improve their
schools; they just don't have the funds to make the necessary changes.
Such reforms include smaller learning communities, adolescent literacy
programs, whole school reforms, personalized learning environments, and
programs that target transitions between middle and secondary school.
Congress must act now and act boldly to correct the shortfalls in our
nation's high schools. We can and must do better. I hope my colleagues
will join me in supporting this bill and addressing the needs of our
high school students.
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:
[[Page S4411]]
S. 921
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 ``Pathways for All Students to
Succeed Act''.
TITLE I--READING AND MATHEMATICS SKILLS FOR SUCCESS
SEC. 101. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) While the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), as amended by the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425),
provides a strong framework for helping children in the early
grades, our Nation still needs a comprehensive strategy to
address the literacy problems and learning gaps of students
in middle school and secondary school.
(2) Approximately 60 percent of students in the poorest
communities fail to graduate from secondary school on time,
in large part because of severe reading deficits that
contribute to academic failure.
(3) Forty percent of students attending high minority
enrollment secondary schools enroll in remedial reading
coursework when entering higher education, in an effort to
gain the skills their secondary education failed to provide.
(4) While 33 percent of all low-income students are
enrolled in secondary schools, only 15 percent of the funding
targeted to disadvantaged students goes to secondary schools.
(5) Data from the 1998 National Assessment of Educational
Progress show that 32 percent of boys and 19 percent of girls
in eighth grade cannot read at a basic level. These numbers
do not change significantly in the secondary school years and
are even more dramatic when students are identified by
minority status.
(6) The 2002 National Assessment of Educational Progress
writing scores indicate that while the percentage of fourth
and eighth graders writing at or above a basic level
increased between 1998 and 2002, the percentage of 12th
graders writing at or above a basic level decreased. These
numbers show that our concentrated efforts for elementary
school students have improved their writing skills, but by
neglecting the needs of secondary school students, we are
squandering these gains.
(7) The United States cannot maintain its position as the
world's strongest economy if we continue to ignore the
literacy needs of adolescents in middle school and secondary
school.
(8) The achievement gap between White and Asian students
and Black and Hispanic students remains wide in the area of
mathematics.
(9) The 2003 National Assessment of Education Progress
shows that the achievement gap between the mathematics scores
of eighth grade Black and Hispanic students and White
students is the same in 2003 as in 1990.
(10) The 2003 National Assessment of Education Progress
shows that eighth grade students eligible for a free or
reduced-price school lunch did not meet the basic mathematics
score, unlike non-eligible students.
(11) According to the latest results from international
assessments, 15-year-olds from the United States performed
below the international average in mathematics literacy and
problem-solving, placing 27th out of 39 countries.
(12) Only 13 of the United States workforce has any post-
secondary education, yet 60 percent of new jobs in the 21st
century will require post-secondary education.
SEC. 102. PURPOSES.
The purposes of this title are--
(1) to provide assistance to State educational agencies and
local educational agencies in establishing effective
research-based reading, writing, and mathematics programs for
students in middle schools and secondary schools, including
students with disabilities and students with limited English
proficiency;
(2) to provide adequate resources to schools to hire and to
provide in-service training for not less than 1 literacy
coach per 20 teachers who can assist middle school and
secondary school teachers to incorporate research-based
reading and writing instruction into the teachers' teaching
of mathematics, science, history, civics, geography,
literature, language arts, and other core academic subjects;
(3) to provide assistance to State educational agencies and
local educational agencies--
(A) in strengthening reading and writing instruction in
middle schools and secondary schools; and
(B) in procuring high-quality diagnostic reading and
writing assessments and comprehensive research-based programs
and instructional materials that will improve reading and
writing performance among students in middle school and
secondary school; and
(4) to provide adequate resources to schools to hire and to
provide in-service training for not less than 1 mathematics
coach per 20 teachers who can assist middle school and
secondary school teachers to utilize research-based
mathematics instruction to develop students' mathematical
abilities and knowledge, and assist teachers in assessing
student learning.
SEC. 103. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) In general.--The terms ``local educational agency'',
``Secretary'', and ``State educational agency'' have the
meaning given the terms in section 9101 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
(2) Eligible local educational agency.--The term ``eligible
local educational agency'' means a local educational agency
who is eligible to receive funds under part A of title I of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311 et seq.).
(3) Literacy coach.--The term ``literacy coach'' means a
certified or licensed teacher with a demonstrated
effectiveness in teaching reading and writing to students
with specialized reading and writing needs, and the ability
to work with classroom teachers to improve the teachers'
instructional techniques to support reading and writing
improvement, who works on site at a school--
(A) to train teachers from across the curriculum to
incorporate the teaching of reading and writing skills into
their instruction of content;
(B) to train teachers to assess students' reading and
writing skills and identify students requiring remediation;
and
(C) to provide or assess remedial literacy instruction,
including for--
(i) students in after school and summer school programs;
(ii) students requiring additional instruction;
(iii) students with disabilities; and
(iv) students with limited English proficiency.
(4) Mathematics coach.--The term ``mathematics coach''
means a certified or licensed teacher, with a demonstrated
effectiveness in teaching mathematics to students with
specialized needs in mathematics, a command of mathematical
content knowledge, and the ability to work with classroom
teachers to improve the teachers' instructional techniques to
support mathematics improvement, who works on site at a
school--
(A) to train teachers to better assess student learning in
mathematics;
(B) to train teachers to assess students' mathematics
skills and identify students requiring remediation; and
(C) to provide or assess remedial mathematics instruction,
including for--
(i) students in after school and summer school programs;
(ii) students requiring additional instruction;
(iii) students with disabilities; and
(iv) students with limited English proficiency.
(5) Middle school.--The term ``middle school'' means a
school that provides middle school education, as determined
under State law.
(6) Secondary school.--The term ``secondary school'' means
a school that provides secondary education, as determined
under State law.
(7) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States,
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
SEC. 104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Literacy Grants.--For the purposes of carrying out
subtitle A, there are authorized to be appropriated
$1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.
(b) Mathematics Grants.--For the purposes of carrying out
subtitle B, there are authorized to be appropriated
$1,000,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.
Subtitle A--Literacy Skills Programs
SEC. 111. LITERACY SKILLS PROGRAMS.
(a) Grants Authorized.--
(1) In general.--From funds appropriated under section
104(a) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall establish a
program, in accordance with the requirements of this
subtitle, that will provide grants to State educational
agencies, and grants or subgrants to eligible local
educational agencies, to establish reading and writing
programs to improve the overall reading and writing
performance of students in middle school and secondary
school.
(2) Length of grant.--A grant to a State educational agency
under this subtitle shall be awarded for a period of 6 years.
(b) Reservation of Funds by the Secretary.--From amounts
appropriated under section 104(a) for a fiscal year, the
Secretary shall reserve--
(1) 3 percent of such amounts to fund national activities
in support of the programs assisted under this subtitle, such
as research and dissemination of best practices, except that
the Secretary may not use the reserved funds to award grants
directly to local educational agencies; and
(2) 2 percent of such amounts for the Bureau of Indian
Affairs to carry out the services and activities described in
section 112(c) for Indian children.
(c) Grant Formulas.--
(1) Formula grants to state educational agencies.--If the
amounts appropriated under section 104(a) for a fiscal year
are equal to or greater than $500,000,000, then the Secretary
shall award grants, from allotments under paragraph (3), to
State educational agencies to enable the State educational
agencies to provide subgrants to eligible local educational
agencies to establish reading and writing programs to improve
[[Page S4412]]
overall reading and writing performance among students in
middle school and secondary school.
(2) Direct grants to eligible local educational agencies.--
(A) In general.--If the amounts appropriated under section
104(a) for a fiscal year are less than $500,000,000, then the
Secretary shall award grants, on a competitive basis,
directly to eligible local educational agencies to establish
reading and writing programs to improve overall reading and
writing performance among students in middle school and
secondary school.
(B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in
awarding grants under this paragraph to eligible local
educational agencies that--
(i) are among the local educational agencies in the State
with the lowest graduation rates, as described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)); and
(ii) have the highest number or percentage of students who
are counted under section 1124(c) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333(c)).
(3) Allotments to states.--
(A) In general.--From funds appropriated under section
104(a) and not reserved under subsection (b) for a fiscal
year, the Secretary shall make an allotment to each State
educational agency having an application approved under
subsection (d) in an amount that bears the same relation to
the funds as the amount the State received under part A of
title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) bears to the amount received under
such part by all States.
(B) Minimum allotment.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A),
no State educational agency shall receive an allotment under
this paragraph for a fiscal year in an amount that is less
than 0.25 percent of the funds allotted to all State
educational agencies under subparagraph (A) for the fiscal
year.
(4) Reallotment.--If a State educational agency does not
apply for a grant under this subtitle, the Secretary shall
reallot the State educational agency's allotment to the
remaining States.
(d) Applications.--
(1) In general.--In order to receive a grant under this
subtitle, a State educational agency shall submit an
application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner,
and accompanied by such information as the Secretary may
require. Each such application shall meet the following
conditions:
(A) A State educational agency shall not include the
application for assistance under this subtitle in a
consolidated application submitted under section 9302 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7842).
(B) The State educational agency's application shall
include an assurance that--
(i) the State educational agency has established a reading
and writing partnership that--
(I) coordinated the development of the application for a
grant under this subtitle; and
(II) will assist in designing and administering the State
educational agency's program under this subtitle; and
(ii) the State educational agency will participate, if
requested, in any evaluation of the State educational
agency's program under this subtitle.
(C) The State educational agency's application shall
include a program plan that contains a description of the
following:
(i) How the State educational agency will assist eligible
local educational agencies in implementing subgrants,
including providing ongoing professional development for
literacy coaches, teachers, paraprofessionals, and
administrators.
(ii) How the State educational agency will help eligible
local educational agencies identify high-quality screening,
diagnostic, and classroom-based instructional reading and
writing assessments.
(iii) How the State educational agency will help eligible
local educational agencies identify high-quality research-
based materials and programs.
(iv) How the State educational agency will help eligible
local educational agencies identify appropriate and effective
materials, programs, and assessments for students with
disabilities and students with limited English proficiency.
(v) How the State educational agency will ensure that
professional development funded under this subtitle--
(I) is based on reading and writing research;
(II) will effectively improve instructional practices for
reading and writing for middle school and secondary school
students; and
(III) is coordinated with professional development
activities funded through other programs (including federally
funded programs such as programs funded under the Adult
Education and Family Literacy Act (20 U.S.C. 9201 et seq.),
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C.
1400 et seq.), and the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.)).
(vi) How funded activities will help teachers and other
instructional staff to implement research-based components of
reading and writing instruction.
(vii) The subgrant process the State educational agency
will use to ensure that eligible local educational agencies
receiving subgrants implement programs and practices based on
reading and writing research.
(viii) How the State educational agency will build on and
promote coordination among reading and writing programs in
the State to increase overall effectiveness in improving
reading and writing instruction, including for students with
disabilities and students with limited English proficiency.
(ix) How the State educational agency will regularly assess
and evaluate the effectiveness of the eligible local
educational agency activities funded under this subtitle.
(2) Review of applications.--The Secretary shall review
applications from State educational agencies under this
subsection as the applications are received.
(e) State Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency
receiving a grant under this subtitle shall--
(1) establish a reading and writing partnership, which may
be the same as the partnership established under section
1203(d) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 6363(d)), that will provide guidance to eligible
local educational agencies in selecting or developing and
implementing appropriate, research-based reading and writing
programs for middle school and secondary school students;
(2) use 80 percent of the grant funds received under this
subtitle for a fiscal year to award subgrants to eligible
local educational agencies having applications approved under
section 112(a); and
(3) use 20 percent of the grant funds received under this
subtitle--
(A) to carry out State-level activities described in the
application submitted under subsection (d);
(B) to provide--
(i) technical assistance to eligible local educational
agencies; and
(ii) high-quality professional development to teachers and
literacy coaches;
(C) to oversee and evaluate subgrant services and
activities undertaken by the eligible local educational
agencies as described in section 112(c); and
(D) for administrative costs,
of which not more than 10 percent of the grant funds may be
used for planning, administration, and reporting.
(f) Notice to Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--Each
State educational agency receiving a grant under this
subtitle shall provide notice to all eligible local
educational agencies in the State about the availability of
subgrants under this subtitle.
(g) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each State educational agency
receiving a grant under this subtitle shall use the grant
funds to supplement not supplant State funding for activities
authorized under this subtitle or for other educational
activities.
(h) New Services and Activities.--Grant funds provided
under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and
activities authorized under this subtitle that were not
provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 112. SUBGRANTS TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.
(a) Application.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible local educational agency
desiring a subgrant under this subtitle shall submit an
application to the State educational agency in the form and
according to the schedule established by the State
educational agency.
(2) Contents.--In addition to any information required by
the State educational agency, each application under
paragraph (1) shall demonstrate how the eligible local
educational agency will carry out the following required
activities:
(A) Development or selection and implementation of
research-based reading and writing assessments.
(B) Development or selection and implementation of
research-based reading and writing programs, including
programs for students with disabilities and students with
limited English proficiency.
(C) Selection of instructional materials based on reading
and writing research.
(D) High-quality professional development for literacy
coaches and teachers based on reading and writing research.
(E) Evaluation strategies.
(F) Reporting.
(G) Providing access to research-based reading and writing
materials.
(3) Consortia.--An eligible local educational agency may
apply to the State educational agency for a subgrant as a
member of a consortium, if each member of the consortium is
an eligible local educational agency.
(b) Award Basis.--
(1) Minimum subgrant amount.--Each eligible local
educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle
for a fiscal year shall receive a minimum subgrant amount
that bears the same relation to the amount of funds made
available to the State educational agency under section
111(e)(2) as the amount the eligible local educational agency
received under part A of title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for
the preceding fiscal year bears to the amount received by all
eligible local educational agencies under such part for the
preceding fiscal year.
(2) Sufficient size and scope.--Subgrants under this
section shall be of sufficient size and scope to enable
eligible local educational agencies to fully implement
activities assisted under this subtitle.
(c) Local Use of Funds.--Each eligible local educational
agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle shall use the
subgrant funds to carry out, at the middle school and
secondary school level, the following services and
activities:
[[Page S4413]]
(1) Hiring literacy coaches, at a ratio of not less than 1
literacy coach for every 20 teachers, and providing
professional development for literacy coaches--
(A) to work with classroom teachers to incorporate reading
and writing instruction within all subject areas, during
regular classroom periods, after school, and during summer
school programs, for all students;
(B) to work with classroom teachers to identify students
with reading and writing problems and, where appropriate,
refer students to available programs for remediation and
additional services;
(C) to work with classroom teachers to diagnose and
remediate reading and writing difficulties of the lowest-
performing students, by providing intensive, research-based
instruction, including during after school and summer
sessions, geared toward ensuring that the students can access
and be successful in rigorous academic coursework; and
(D) to assess and organize student data on literacy and
communicate that data to school administrators to inform
school reform efforts.
(2) Reviewing, analyzing, developing, and, where possible,
adapting curricula to make sure literacy skills are taught
within the content area subjects.
(3) Providing reading and writing professional development
for all teachers in middle school and secondary school that
addresses both remedial and higher level literacy skills for
students in the applicable curriculum.
(4) Providing professional development for teachers,
administrators, and paraprofessionals serving middle schools
and secondary schools to help the teachers, administrators,
and paraprofessionals meet literacy needs.
(5) Procuring and implementing programs and instructional
materials based on reading and writing research, including
software and other education technology related to reading
and writing instruction.
(6) Building on and promoting coordination among reading
and writing programs in the eligible local educational agency
to increase overall effectiveness in improving reading and
writing instruction, including for students with disabilities
and students with limited English proficiency.
(7) Evaluating the effectiveness of the instructional
strategies, teacher professional development programs, and
other interventions that are implemented under the subgrant.
(d) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each eligible local
educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle
shall use the subgrant funds to supplement not supplant the
eligible local educational agency funding for activities
authorized under this subtitle or for other educational
activities.
(e) New Services and Activities.--Subgrant funds provided
under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and
activities authorized under this subtitle that were not
provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
(f) Evaluations.--Each eligible local educational agency
receiving a grant under this subtitle shall participate, as
requested by the State educational agency or the Secretary,
in reviews and evaluations of the programs of the eligible
local educational agency and the effectiveness of such
programs, and shall provide such reports as are requested by
the State educational agency and the Secretary.
Subtitle B--Mathematics Skills Programs
SEC. 121. MATHEMATICS SKILLS PROGRAMS.
(a) Grants Authorized.--
(1) In general.--From funds appropriated under section
104(b) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall establish a
program, in accordance with the requirements of this
subtitle, that will provide grants to State educational
agencies, and grants and subgrants to eligible local
educational agencies, to establish mathematics programs to
improve the overall mathematics performance of students in
middle school and secondary school.
(2) Length of grant.--A grant to a State educational agency
under this subtitle shall be awarded for a period of 6 years.
(b) Reservation of Funds by the Secretary.--From amounts
appropriated under section 104(b) for a fiscal year, the
Secretary shall reserve--
(1) 3 percent of such amounts to fund national activities
in support of the programs assisted under this subtitle, such
as research and dissemination of best practices, except that
the Secretary may not use the reserved funds to award grants
directly to local educational agencies; and
(2) 2 percent of such amounts for the Bureau of Indian
Affairs to carry out the services and activities described in
section 122(c) for Indian children.
(c) Grant Formulas.--
(1) Formula grants to state educational agencies.--If the
amounts appropriated under section 104(b) for a fiscal year
are equal to or greater than $500,000,000, then the Secretary
shall award grants, from allotments under paragraph (3), to
State educational agencies to enable the State educational
agencies to provide subgrants to eligible local educational
agencies to establish mathematics programs to improve overall
mathematics performance among students in middle school and
secondary school.
(2) Direct grants to eligible local educational agencies.--
(A) In general.--If the amounts appropriated under section
104(b) for a fiscal year are less than $500,000,000, then the
Secretary shall award grants, on a competitive basis,
directly to eligible local educational agencies to establish
mathematics programs to improve overall mathematics
performance among students in middle school and secondary
school.
(B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in
awarding grants under this paragraph to eligible local
educational agencies that--
(i) are among the local educational agencies in the State
with the lowest graduation rates, as described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)); and
(ii) have the highest number or percentage of students who
are counted under section 1124(c) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333(c)).
(3) Allotments to states.--
(A) In general.--From funds appropriated under section
104(b) and not reserved under subsection (b) for a fiscal
year, the Secretary shall make an allotment to each State
educational agency having an application approved under
subsection (d) in an amount that bears the same relation to
the funds as the amount the State received under part A of
title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) bears to the amount received under
such part by all States.
(B) Minimum allotment.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (A),
no State educational agency shall receive an allotment under
this paragraph for a fiscal year in an amount that is less
than 0.25 percent of the funds allotted to all State
educational agencies under subparagraph (A) for the fiscal
year.
(4) Reallotment.--If a State educational agency does not
apply for a grant under this subtitle, the Secretary shall
reallot the State educational agency's allotment to the
remaining States.
(d) Applications.--
(1) In general.--In order to receive a grant under this
subtitle, a State educational agency shall submit an
application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner,
and accompanied by such information as the Secretary may
require. Each such application shall meet the following
conditions:
(A) A State educational agency shall not include the
application for assistance under this subtitle in a
consolidated application submitted under section 9302 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7842).
(B) The State educational agency's application shall
include an assurance that--
(i) the State educational agency has established a
mathematics partnership that--
(I) coordinated the development of the application for a
grant under this subtitle; and
(II) will assist in designing and administering the State
educational agency's program under this subtitle; and
(ii) the State educational agency will participate, if
requested, in any evaluation of the State educational
agency's program under this subtitle.
(C) The State educational agency's application shall
include a program plan that contains a description of the
following:
(i) How the State educational agency will assist eligible
local educational agencies in implementing subgrants,
including providing ongoing professional development for
mathematics coaches, teachers, paraprofessionals, and
administrators.
(ii) How the State educational agency will help eligible
local educational agencies identify high-quality screening,
diagnostic, and classroom-based instructional mathematics
assessments.
(iii) How the State educational agency will help eligible
local educational agencies identify high-quality research-
based mathematics materials and programs.
(iv) How the State educational agency will help eligible
local educational agencies identify appropriate and effective
materials, programs, and assessments for students with
disabilities and students with limited English proficiency.
(v) How the State educational agency will ensure that
professional development funded under this subtitle--
(I) is based on mathematics research;
(II) will effectively improve instructional practices for
mathematics for middle school and secondary school students;
and
(III) is coordinated with professional development
activities funded through other programs.
(vi) How funded activities will help teachers and other
instructional staff to implement research-based components of
mathematics instruction.
(vii) The subgrant process the State educational agency
will use to ensure that eligible local educational agencies
receiving subgrants implement programs and practices based on
mathematics research.
(viii) How the State educational agency will build on and
promote coordination among mathematics programs in the State
to increase overall effectiveness in improving mathematics
instruction, including for students with disabilities and
students with limited English proficiency.
(ix) How the State educational agency will regularly assess
and evaluate the effectiveness of the eligible local
educational agency activities funded under this subtitle.
(2) Review of applications.--The Secretary shall review
applications from State educational agencies under this
subsection as the applications are received.
(e) State Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency
receiving a grant under this subtitle shall--
[[Page S4414]]
(1) establish a mathematics partnership that will provide
guidance to eligible local educational agencies in selecting
or developing and implementing appropriate, research-based
mathematics programs for middle school and secondary school
students;
(2) use 80 percent of the grant funds received under this
subtitle for a fiscal year to approve high-quality
applications for subgrants to eligible local educational
agencies having applications approved under section 122(a);
and
(3) use 20 percent of the grant funds received under this
subtitle--
(A) to carry out State-level activities described in the
application submitted under subsection (d);
(B) to provide--
(i) technical assistance to eligible local educational
agencies; and
(ii) high-quality professional development to teachers and
mathematics coaches;
(C) to oversee and evaluate subgrant services and
activities undertaken by the eligible local educational
agencies as described in section 122(c); and
(D) for administrative costs,
of which not more than 10 percent of the grant funds may be
used for planning, administration, and reporting.
(f) Notice to Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--Each
State educational agency receiving a grant under this
subtitle shall provide notice to all eligible local
educational agencies in the State about the availability of
subgrants under this subtitle.
(g) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each State educational agency
receiving a grant under this subtitle shall use the grant
funds to supplement not supplant State funding for activities
authorized under this subtitle or for other educational
activities.
(h) New Services and Activities.--Grant funds provided
under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and
activities authorized under this subtitle that were not
provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 122. SUBGRANTS TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.
(a) Application.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible local educational agency
desiring a subgrant under this subtitle shall submit an
application to the State educational agency in the form and
according to the schedule established by the State
educational agency.
(2) Contents.--In addition to any information required by
the State educational agency, each application under
paragraph (1) shall demonstrate how the eligible local
educational agency will carry out the following required
activities:
(A) Development or selection and implementation of
research-based mathematics assessments.
(B) Development or selection and implementation of
research-based mathematics programs, including programs for
students with disabilities and students with limited English
proficiency.
(C) Selection of instructional materials based on
mathematics research.
(D) High-quality professional development for mathematics
coaches and teachers based on mathematics research.
(E) Evaluation strategies.
(F) Reporting.
(G) Providing access to research-based mathematics
materials.
(3) Consortia.--An eligible local educational agency may
apply to the State educational agency for a subgrant as a
member of a consortium if each member of the consortium is an
eligible local educational agency.
(b) Award Basis.--
(1) Minimum subgrant amount.--Each eligible local
educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle
for a fiscal year shall receive a minimum subgrant amount
that bears the same relation to the amount of funds made
available to the State educational agency under section
121(e)(2) as the amount the eligible local educational agency
received under part A of title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for
the preceding fiscal year bears to the amount received by all
eligible local educational agencies under such part for the
preceding fiscal year.
(2) Sufficient size and scope.--Subgrants under this
section shall be of sufficient size and scope to enable
eligible local educational agencies to fully implement
activities assisted under this subtitle.
(c) Local Use of Funds.--Each eligible local educational
agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle shall use the
subgrant funds to carry out, at the middle school and
secondary school level, the following services and
activities:
(1) Hiring mathematics coaches, at a ratio of not less than
1 mathematics coach for every 20 teachers, and providing
professional development for mathematics coaches--
(A) to work with classroom teachers to better assess
student learning in mathematics;
(B) to work with classroom teachers to identify students
with mathematics problems and, where appropriate, refer
students to available programs for remediation and additional
services;
(C) to work with classroom teachers to diagnose and
remediate mathematics difficulties of the lowest-performing
students, by providing intensive, research-based instruction,
including during after school and summer sessions, geared
toward ensuring that those students can access and be
successful in rigorous academic coursework; and
(D) to assess and organize student data on mathematics and
communicate that data to school administrators to inform
school reform efforts.
(2) Reviewing, analyzing, developing, and, where possible,
adapting curricula to make sure mathematics skills are taught
within the content area subjects.
(3) Providing mathematics professional development for all
teachers in middle school and secondary school that addresses
both remedial and higher level mathematics skills for
students in the applicable curriculum.
(4) Providing professional development for teachers,
administrators, and paraprofessionals serving middle schools
and secondary schools to help the teachers, administrators,
and paraprofessionals meet mathematics needs.
(5) Procuring and implementing programs and instructional
materials based on mathematics research, including software
and other education technology related to mathematics
instruction.
(6) Building on and promoting coordination among
mathematics programs in the eligible local educational agency
to increase overall effectiveness in improving mathematics
instruction, including for students with disabilities and
students with limited English proficiency.
(7) Evaluating the effectiveness of the instructional
strategies, teacher professional development programs, and
other interventions that are implemented under the subgrant.
(d) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each eligible local
educational agency receiving a subgrant under this subtitle
shall use the subgrant funds to supplement not supplant the
eligible local educational agency funding for activities
authorized under this subtitle or for other educational
activities.
(e) New Services and Activities.--Subgrant funds provided
under this subtitle may be used only to provide services and
activities authorized under this subtitle that were not
provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
(f) Evaluations.--Each eligible local educational agency
receiving a grant under this subtitle shall participate, as
requested by the State educational agency or the Secretary,
in reviews and evaluations of the programs of the eligible
local educational agency and the effectiveness of such
programs, and shall provide such reports as are requested by
the State educational agency and the Secretary.
TITLE II--PATHWAYS TO SUCCESS
SEC. 201. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) In 2003, approximately 60 percent of students in the
poorest communities failed to graduate from secondary school
on time.
(2) All ninth grade students should have a plan that
assesses the student's instructional needs and outlines the
coursework the student must complete to graduate on time,
properly prepared for college and career.
(3) Research shows that 1 of the most important factors
behind student success in secondary school is a close
connection with at least 1 adult who demonstrates concern for
the student's advancement.
(4) Secondary school counselors can help students receive
the instructional, tutorial, and social supports that
contribute to academic success.
(5) Model programs around the Nation have demonstrated that
effective academic and support plans for students, developed
by counselors serving as academic coaches, in cooperation
with students and parents, result in a higher percentage of
students graduating from secondary school well prepared for
college study.
SEC. 202. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) In general.--The terms ``local educational agency'',
``poverty line'', ``secondary school'', ``Secretary'', and
``State educational agency'' have the meaning given the terms
in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
(2) Academic counselor.--The term ``academic counselor''
means a highly qualified professional who has received
professional development appropriate to perform the services
described in section 205(c).
(3) Eligible local educational agency.--The term ``eligible
local educational agency'' means a local educational agency
who has jurisdiction over not less than 1 secondary school
receiving assistance under part A of title I of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311 et seq.).
(4) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the 50 States,
the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico,
the United States Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and
the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
SEC. 203. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.
The Secretary is authorized to establish a program, in
accordance with the requirements of this title, that--
(1) enables a secondary school that receives assistance
under title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), to hire a sufficient number
of academic counselors, in a ratio of not less than 1
counselor to 150 students, to develop personal plans for each
student at the school, including students with limited
English proficiency;
(2) involves parents in the development and implementation
of the personal plans; and
(3) provides academic counselors and staff at the schools
receiving grants under this
[[Page S4415]]
title the opportunity to coordinate with other programs and
services, including those supported by Federal funds, to
ensure that students have access to the resources and
services necessary to fulfill the students' personal plans.
SEC. 204. GRANTS TO STATES.
(a) Grants Authorized.--From amounts made available under
section 206 and not reserved under subsection (i), the
Secretary shall award grants, from allotments under
subsection (b), to State educational agencies to enable the
State educational agencies to provide subgrants to eligible
local educational agencies to implement programs in secondary
schools in accordance with this title.
(b) Allotments to States.--
(1) In general.--From funds appropriated under section 206
and not reserved under subsection (i) for a fiscal year, the
Secretary shall make an allotment to each State educational
agency having an application approved under subsection (d) in
an amount that bears the same relation to the funds as the
amount the State received under part A of title I of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6311 et seq.) bears to the amount received under such part by
all States.
(2) Minimum allotment.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), no
State educational agency shall receive an allotment under
this subsection for a fiscal year in an amount that is less
than 0.25 percent of the amount allotted to the State
educational agencies under subsection (e)(1) for the fiscal
year.
(3) Ratable reductions.--If the amount appropriated to
carry out this title for any fiscal year is less than
$2,000,000,000, then the Secretary shall ratably reduce the
allotment made to each State educational agency under this
subsection in proportion to the relative number of children
who are counted under section 1124(c) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6333(c)), in the
State compared to such number for all States.
(c) Length of Grants.--A grant to a State educational
agency under this title shall be awarded for a period of 6
years.
(d) Applications.--In order to receive a grant under this
title, a State educational agency shall submit an application
to the Secretary in the form and according to the schedule
established by the Secretary by regulation.
(e) State Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency
receiving a grant under this title shall use--
(1) 80 percent of the grant funds to award subgrants to
eligible local educational agencies under section 205; and
(2) 20 percent of the grant funds to provide professional
development to academic counselors and technical assistance
to local educational agencies, and to pay for administrative
costs, of which not more than 10 percent of such 20 percent
may be used for planning, administration, and reporting.
(f) Supplement Not Supplant.--Grant funds provided to State
educational agencies under this title shall be used to
supplement not supplant funding provided by the State for
activities authorized under this title or for other
educational activities.
(g) New Services and Activities.--Grant funds provided
under this title may be used only to provide services and
activities authorized under this title that were not provided
on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
(h) Reallotment.--If a State educational agency does not
apply for funding under this title, the Secretary shall
reallot the State educational agency's allotment to the
remaining eligible State educational agencies.
(i) Reservations.--Of the funds appropriated under section
206 for each fiscal year, the Secretary shall reserve--
(1) 2 percent for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to carry out
the authorized activities described in section 205(c); and
(2) 3 percent for national activities that support the
programs assisted under this title, except that the Secretary
shall not use such reserved funds to award grants directly to
local educational agencies.
SEC. 205. SUBGRANTS TO ELIGIBLE LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES.
(a) Subgrants Authorized.--From amounts made available
under section 204(e)(1), a State educational agency shall
award subgrants to eligible local educational agencies having
applications approved under subsection (b) to enable the
eligible local educational agencies to carry out the
authorized activities described in subsection (c).
(b) Applications.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible local educational agency
desiring a subgrant under this title shall submit an
application to the State educational agency in the form and
according to the schedule established by the State
educational agency. Each such application shall describe how
the eligible local educational agency will--
(A) hire a sufficient number of highly qualified academic
counselors to develop personal plans for all students in such
students' first year of secondary school, with a ratio of 1
academic counselor to not more than 150 students in each
secondary school served under the subgrant;
(B) provide adequate resources to each such school to offer
the supplemental and other support services that the
implementation of students' personal plans require, and
provide such supplemental services, where possible, through
coordination with Federal TRIO programs under chapter 1 of
subpart 2 of part A of title IV of the Higher Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 et seq.), Gear Up programs under
chapter 2 of such subpart (20 U.S.C. 1070a-21 et seq.),
programs under title I of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), 21st Century
Community Learning Centers under part B of title IV of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7171 et seq.), programs under the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.) (in
accordance with students' individualized education programs),
and programs under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and
Technical Education Act of 1998 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.);
(C) include parents in the development and implementation
of students' personal plans; and
(D) provide staff at each such school with opportunities
for appropriate professional development and coordination to
help the staff support students in implementing the students'
personal plans.
(2) Consortia.--An eligible local educational agency may
apply to the State educational agency for a subgrant as a
consortium, if each member of the consortium is an eligible
local educational agency.
(c) Authorized Activities.--Each eligible local educational
agency receiving a subgrant under this title shall use the
subgrant funds to provide the following services:
(1) Hiring academic counselors (at a ratio of not less than
1 counselor per 150 students) to develop the 6-year personal
plans for all students in such students' first year of
secondary school and coordinate the services required to
implement such personal plans. Such academic counselors
shall--
(A) work with students and their families to develop an
individual plan that will define such students' career and
education goals, assure enrollment in the coursework
necessary for on-time graduation and preparation for career
development or postsecondary education, and identify the
courses and supplemental services necessary to meet those
goals;
(B) advocate for students, helping the students to access
the services and supports necessary to achieve the goals laid
out in the personal plan for the student;
(C) assure student access to services, both academic and
nonacademic, needed to lower barriers to succeed as needed;
(D) assess student progress on a regular basis;
(E) work with school and eligible local educational agency
administrators to promote reforms based on student needs and
performance data;
(F) involve parents or caregivers, including those parents
or caregivers who are limited English proficient, and
teachers, in the development of students' personal plans to
ensure the support and assistance of the parents, caregivers,
and teachers in meeting the goals outlined in such personal
plans; and
(G) communicate to students and their families the
importance of implementing the 2 years of the personal plan
following secondary school graduation, and work with
institutions of higher education to help students transition
successfully and fully implement the students' personal
plans.
(2) Determining the academic needs of all students entering
grade 9 and identifying barriers to success.
(3) Ensuring availability of the services necessary for the
implementation of students' personal plans, including access
to a college preparatory curriculum and advanced placement or
international baccalaureate courses.
(4) Where appropriate, modifying the curriculum at a
secondary school receiving subgrant funds under this title to
address the instructional requirements of students' personal
plans.
(5) Providing for the ongoing assessment of students for
whom personal plans have been developed and modifying such
personal plans as necessary.
(6) Coordinating the services offered with subgrant funds
received under this title with other Federal, State, and
local funds, including programs authorized under title I of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
6301 et seq.), sections 402A and 404A of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a-11 and 1070a-21), the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400
et seq.) (in accordance with students' individualized
education programs), and the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and
Technical Education Act of 1998 (20 U.S.C. 2301 et seq.).
(d) Eligible Local Educational Agency Priority.--In
awarding subgrants to eligible local educational agencies, a
State educational agency shall give priority to eligible
local educational agencies with--
(1) the largest number or percentage of students in grades
6 through 12 reading below grade level; or
(2) the lowest graduation rates as described in section
1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)).
(e) School Priority.--In awarding subgrant funds to
secondary schools, an eligible local educational agency shall
give priority to secondary schools that--
(1) have the highest percentages or numbers of students in
grades 6 through 12 reading below grade level;
(2) have the highest percentages or numbers of children
living below the poverty line according to census figures; or
[[Page S4416]]
(3) have the lowest graduation rates as described in
section 1111(b)(2)(C)(vi) of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(b)(2)(C)(vi)).
(f) Minimum Subgrant Amount.--Each eligible local
educational agency receiving a subgrant under this title for
a fiscal year shall receive a minimum subgrant amount that
bears the same relation to the amount of funds made available
to the State educational agency under section 204(e)(1) as
the amount the eligible local educational agency received
under part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for the
preceding fiscal year bears to the amount received by all
eligible local educational agencies in the State under such
part for the preceding fiscal year.
(g) Sufficient Size and Scope.--Subgrants under this
section shall be of sufficient size and scope to enable
eligible local educational agencies to fully implement
activities assisted under this title.
(h) Supplement Not Supplant.--Each eligible local
educational agency receiving a subgrant under this section
shall use the subgrant funds to supplement not supplant
funding for activities authorized under this title or for
other educational activities.
(i) New Services and Activities.--Subgrant funds provided
under this section may be used only to provide services and
activities authorized under this section that were not
provided on the day before the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 206. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
For the purposes of carrying out this title, there are
authorized to be appropriated $2,000,000,000 for fiscal year
2006 and such sums as may be necessary for each of the 5
succeeding fiscal years.
TITLE III--FOSTERING SUCCESSFUL SECONDARY SCHOOLS
SEC. 301. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Personalization of the school environment has been
proven to be an essential factor in helping low-performing
secondary school students succeed.
(2) Effective schools provide ongoing, high-quality
professional development for teachers and administrators to
improve instruction.
(3) Student success is dependent upon alignment of
curriculum, instruction, and assessment.
(4) Successful schools adapt instruction to the unique
interests and talents of each student.
(5) Successful schools have high expectations for all
students and offer a rigorous curriculum for the entire
student body.
(6) Ongoing assessment is the best way to measure how each
student is learning and responding to the teacher's
instructional methods.
(7) Effective secondary schools have access to, and
utilize, data related to student performance prior to, and
following, secondary school enrollment.
(8) Despite significant increases to the program, only
about 7 percent of funding for title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) goes
to secondary schools.
(9) Every year, 1,300,000 students do not graduate with
their peers, which means every school day, our Nation loses
7,000 students.
(10) Nationally, of 100 ninth-graders, only 68 will
graduate from high school on time, only 38 will directly
enter college, only 26 will still be enrolled for the
sophomore year, and only 18 will end up graduating from
college. The numbers for minority students are even lower.
(11) Even secondary school graduates going on to college
are struggling with basic literacy skills, with 40 percent of
all 4-year college students taking a remedial course and 63
percent of all community college students assigned to at
least 1 remedial course.
SEC. 302. PURPOSES.
It is the purpose of this title to implement research-based
programs, practices, and models that will improve student
achievement in low performing secondary schools.
SEC. 303. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) In general.--The terms ``institution of higher
education'', ``local educational agency'', ``secondary
school'', ``Secretary'', and ``State educational agency''
have the meanings given the terms in section 9101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7801).
(2) Eligible local educational agency.--The term ``eligible
local educational agency'' means a local educational agency
that has jurisdiction over not less than 1 eligible secondary
school.
(3) Eligible partnership.--The term ``eligible
partnership'' means--
(A) an eligible local educational agency in partnership
with a regional educational laboratory, an institution of
higher education, or another nonprofit institution with
significant experience in implementing and evaluating
education reforms; or
(B) a consortium of eligible secondary schools or eligible
local educational agencies, each of which is an eligible
entity described in subparagraph (A).
(4) Eligible secondary school.--The term ``eligible
secondary school'' means a secondary school identified for
school improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), as
of the day preceding the date of enactment of the Pathways
for All Students to Succeed Act.
(5) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several
States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin
Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands.
SEC. 304. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED; AUTHORIZATION OF
APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary is authorized to
award grants to State educational agencies, from allotments
under section 305(b), to enable the State educational
agencies to award subgrants to eligible local educational
agencies, from allocations under section 305(c)(2), to
promote secondary school improvement and student achievement.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this title $500,000,000 for
fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be necessary for each
of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.
SEC. 305. RESERVATIONS, STATE ALLOTMENTS, AND LOCAL
ALLOCATIONS.
(a) Reservations.--From funds appropriated under section
304(b) for a fiscal year the Secretary shall reserve--
(1) 2 percent for schools funded or supported by the Bureau
of Indian Affairs to carry out the purposes of this title for
Indian children;
(2) 3 percent to carry out national activities in support
of the purposes of this title; and
(3) 95 percent for allotment to the States in accordance
with subsection (b).
(b) Allotment to States.--
(1) In general.--From funds reserved under subsection
(a)(3) for a fiscal year, the Secretary shall make an
allotment to each State educational agency in an amount that
bears the same relationship to the funds as the number of
schools in that State that have been identified for school
improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), bears to
the number of schools in all States that have been identified
for school improvement under such section 1116(b).
(2) Reallotment.--The portion of any State educational
agency's allotment that is not used by the State educational
agency shall be reallotted among the remaining State
educational agencies on the same basis as the original
allotments were made under paragraph (1).
(c) Allocations to Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--
(1) Reservations.--Each State educational agency receiving
a grant under this title shall reserve--
(A) not more than 10 percent of the grant funds--
(i) for State-level activities to provide high-quality
professional development and technical assistance to local
educational agencies receiving funds under this title and to
other local educational agencies as appropriate, including
the dissemination and implementation of research-based
programs, practices, and models for secondary school
improvement; and
(ii) to contract for the evaluation of all programs and
activities in the State that are assisted under this title;
and
(B) not less than 90 percent of the grant funds to award
subgrants to eligible local educational agencies to enable
the eligible local educational agencies to carry out the
activities described in section 306.
(2) Local allocation.--From funds reserved under paragraph
(1)(B), the State educational agency shall allocate to each
eligible local educational agency in the State an amount that
bears the same relation to such funds as the number of
secondary schools that have been identified for school
improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), that are
served by the eligible local educational agency, bears to the
number of such schools served by all eligible local
educational agencies in the State.
SEC. 306. LOCAL USES OF FUNDS.
Each eligible local educational agency receiving a subgrant
under this title shall use the subgrant funds for activities
to improve secondary schools that have been identified for
school improvement under section 1116(b) of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6316(b)), such
as--
(1) developing and implementing research-based programs or
models that have been shown to raise achievement among
secondary school students, including smaller learning
communities, adolescent literacy programs, block scheduling,
whole school reforms, individualized learning plans,
personalized learning environments, and strategies to target
students making the transition from middle school to
secondary school;
(2) promoting community investment in school quality by
engaging parents, businesses, and community-based
organizations in the development of reform plans for eligible
secondary schools;
(3) researching, developing, and implementing a school
district strategy to create smaller learning communities for
secondary school students, both by creating smaller learning
communities within existing secondary schools, and by
developing new, smaller, and more personalized secondary
schools;
(4) providing professional development for school staff in
research-based practices, such as interactive instructional
strategies and opportunities to connect learning with
experience; and
[[Page S4417]]
(5) providing professional development and leadership
training for principals and other school leaders in the best
practices of instructional leadership and implementing school
reforms to raise student achievement.
SEC. 307. APPLICATIONS.
(a) States.--Each State educational agency desiring a grant
under this title shall submit to the Secretary an application
at such time, in such manner, and containing such information
as the Secretary may require to ensure compliance with the
requirements of this title.
(b) Eligible Local Educational Agencies.--Each eligible
local educational agency desiring a subgrant under this title
shall submit to the State educational agency an application
at such time, in such manner, and containing such information
as the State educational agency may require to ensure
compliance with the requirements of this title. Each such
application shall describe how the eligible local educational
agency will form an eligible partnership to carry out the
activities assisted under this title.
SEC. 308. EVALUATIONS.
In cooperation with the State educational agencies
receiving funds under this title, the Secretary shall
undertake or contract for a rigorous evaluation of the
effectiveness and success of activities conducted under this
title.
TITLE IV--DATA CAPACITY
SEC. 401. GRANTS FOR INCREASING DATA CAPACITY FOR PURPOSES OF
ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
(a) Program Authorized.--From funds appropriated under
subsection (e) for a fiscal year, the Secretary may award
grants, on a competitive basis, to State educational agencies
to enable the State educational agencies to develop or
increase the capacity of data systems for assessment and
accountability purposes, including the collection of
graduation rates.
(b) Application.--Each State educational agency desiring a
grant under this section shall submit an application to the
Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary may require.
(c) Use of Funds.--Each State educational agency that
receives a grant under this section shall use the grant funds
for the purpose of--
(1) increasing the capacity of, or creating, State
databases to collect, disaggregate, and report information
related to student achievement, enrollment, and graduation
rates for assessment and accountability purposes; and
(2) reporting, on an annual basis, for the elementary
schools and secondary schools within the State, on--
(A) the enrollment data from the beginning of the academic
year;
(B) the enrollment data from the end of the academic year;
and
(C) the twelfth grade graduation rates.
(d) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Graduation rate.--The term ``graduation rate'' means
the percentage that--
(A) the total number of students who--
(i) graduate from a secondary school with a regular diploma
(which shall not include the recognized equivalent of a
secondary school diploma or an alternative degree) in an
academic year; and
(ii) graduated on time by progressing 1 grade per academic
year; represents of
(B) the total number of students who entered the secondary
school in the entry level academic year applicable to the
graduating students.
(2) State educational agency.--The term ``State educational
agency'' has the meaning given such term in section 9101 of
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C.
7801).
(3) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Education.
(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $50,000,000 for
fiscal year 2006, and such sums as may be necessary for each
of the 2 succeeding fiscal years.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I am pleased to support the introduction
today, along with my colleagues Senators Clinton and Kennedy, of
Senator Murray's bill to improve America's high schools.
We have all heard a lot of talk these days about the need to improve
America's high schools. Bill Gates makes the point that the academic
caliber of our high school graduates is one of the greatest factors in
our country's ability to innovate and to compete internationally in
technological advancements. The CEO of Intel, Craig Barrett, tells the
story of the how U.S. students are eclipsed in the international
science competition his firm sponsors. University presidents I meet
with talk about the strain that remedial education for incoming
freshmen places on the school's faculty and budgets.
The President's budget this year includes his high school initiative,
which proposes to redirect money to high schools. There's a big catch,
though. The President says that to fund his high school initiative we
need to eliminate one of our most effective education programs for high
schools, technical schools and colleges--Perkins Vocational and
Technical Education grants.
There is a better way. The Pathways for All Students to Success
(PASS) Act provides the resources schools need to sharpen the focus on
literacy and math--skills critical to success in the workforce or in
post-secondary studies. High schools can employ literacy and math
coaches to help support and supplement the teachers in traditional
classrooms. The legislation also allows for additional academic
counseling, to provide that targeted, individualized assistance that
many students need to achieve proficiency in key academic areas.
The PASS Act also provides funding that allows schools not meeting
national standards to implement proven, comprehensive school reform to
help students learn. Finally, current data on high school graduation
rates is incomplete, inconsistent and often inaccurate. That makes it
harder for schools to know which populations of students are most in
need of additional attention. This legislation provides funding for
school systems to collect, disaggregate and report accurate graduation
rates.
Now is the time to strengthen our high schools. Expectations in the
workplace and on post-secondary campuses are higher than ever for high
school graduates. The PASS Act supports students working toward high
school graduation, enhancing their pathway to success.
______
By Mr. SANTORUM (for himself and Mr. Lieberman):
S. 922. A bill to establish and provide for the treatment of
Individual Development Accounts, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I along with Senator Lieberman am
introducing the Savings and Working Families Act of 2005.
The need for this legislation comes at a time when Americans face an
ongoing savings and assets crisis. One third of all Americans have no
assets available for investment, and another fifth have only negligible
assets. The United States household savings rate lags far behind that
of other industrial nations, constraining national economic growth and
keeping many Americans from entering the economic mainstream by buying
a house, obtaining an adequate education, or starting a business.
Low-income Americans face a huge hurdle when trying to save.
Individual Development Accounts, IDAs, provide them with a way to work
toward building assets while instilling the practice of savings into
their everyday lives. IDAs are one of the most promising tools that
enable low-income and low-wealth American families to save, build
assets, and enter the financial mainstream. Based on the idea that all
Americans should have access, through the tax code or through direct
expenditures, to the structures that subsidize homeownership and
retirement savings of wealthier families, IDAs encourage savings
efforts among the poor by offering them a one-to-one match for their
own deposits. IDAs reward the monthly savings of working-poor families
who are trying to buy their first home, pay for post-secondary
education, or start a small business. These matched savings accounts
are similar to 401(k) plans and other matched savings accounts, but can
serve a broad range of purposes.
The Savings and Working Families Act of 2005 builds on existing IDA
programs by creating tax credit incentives for an additional 900,000
accounts. Individuals between 18 and 60 who are not dependents or
students and meet the income requirements would be eligible to
establish and contribute to an IDA. For single filers, the income limit
would be $20,000 in modified aggregate gross income, AGI. The
corresponding thresholds for head-of-household and joint filers would
be $30,000 and $40,000, respectively.
Participants could generally withdraw their contributions and
matching funds for qualified purposes, which include certain higher
education expenses, first-time home purchase expenditures, and small
business capitalization.
Additionally, this bill would create a tax credit to defray the cost
of establishing and running IDA programs, contributing matching funds
to the appropriate accounts, and providing financial education to
account holders. Program sponsors could be qualified institutions,
qualified nonprofits, or
[[Page S4418]]
qualified Indian tribes, and would have to be an institution eligible
under current law to serve as the custodian of IRAs. Sponsors could
claim a tax credit that would have two components. The first would be a
$50 credit per account to offset the ongoing costs of maintaining and
administering each account and providing financial education to
participants. Except for the first year that an account is open, the
credit would be available only for accounts with a balance, at year's
end, of more than $100. In addition, there would be a credit for the
dollar-to-dollar matching amounts.
IDAs work to spur savings by low-income individuals. The American
Dream Demonstration, ADD, a 14-site IDA program, has proven that low-
income families, with proper incentives and support, can and do save
for longer-term goals. In ADD, average monthly net deposits per
participant were $19.07, with the average participant saving 50 percent
of the monthly savings target and making deposits in 6 of 12 months.
Participants accumulated an average of $700 per year including matching
contributions. Importantly, deposits increased as the monthly target
increased, indicating that low-income families' saving behavior, like
that of wealthier individuals; is influenced by the incentives they
receive.
Additionally, key to the success of IDAs is the economic education
that participants receive. Information about repairing credit, reducing
expenditures, applying for the Earned Income Tax Credit, avoiding
predatory lenders, and accessing financial services helps IDA
participants to reach savings goals and to integrate themselves into
the mainstream economic system. The encouragement and connection to
supportive services helps low-income individuals to keep early
withdrawals to a minimum and overcome obstacles to saving. Banks and
credit unions benefit from these new customer relations, and States
benefit from decreased presence of check-cashing, pawnshop, and other
predatory outlets.
But more than income enhancement, asset accumulation affects
individuals' confidence about the future, willingness to defer
gratification, avoidance of risky behavior, and investment in
community. In families where assets are owned, children do better in
school, voting participation increases, and family stability improves.
Reliance on public assistance decreases as families use their assets to
access higher education and better jobs, reduce their housing costs
through ownership, and create their own job opportunities through
entrepreneurship.
We must re-instill the value that Americans once put into saving and
promote an ownership society. Saving must once again become a national
virtue. At stake are not just the financial security and prosperity of
Americans as individuals but America as a nation. This bill takes a
step in reaching out to low-income Americans to meet this goal.
I urge my colleagues to support the Savings and Working Families Act
of 2005.
______
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Lautenberg, and Mr. Obama):
S. 923. A bill to amend part A of title IV of the Social Security Act
to require a State to promote financial education under the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program and to allow financial
education to count as a work activity under that program; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the TANF
Financial Education Promotion Act of 2005 in order to call attention to
an important issue for low-income families financial literacy. I am
proud to be reintroducing this bill during the month of April, which is
Financial Literacy Month.
One of the goals of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
(TANF) Program is to help low-income families transition from welfare
to work. However, there is more to leaving poverty than just finding a
job. Welfare recipients must learn the skills that will help them build
savings and establish good credit so that they can stay off welfare.
Currently, TANF does not offer financial education to low-income
individuals, leaving welfare recipients at risk of dependence upon
public assistance.
Furthermore, millions of low-income families, including families
receiving TANF, are unbanked. These households tend to do their banking
at check-cashing outlets that charge exorbitant fees for such services.
A lack of basic consumer finance education, including lack of
familiarity with how a checking or savings account works, has been
cited as a major reason why millions of Americans do not set up such
accounts.
Not only are low-income people more likely to be unbanked than other
individuals, but they are also the most vulnerable to abusive lending
practices and hostile credit arrangements. Those with the fewest
financial resources end up paying the most to obtain financing.
Financial education that addresses predatory lending will help prevent
low-income families from becoming victims of unaffordable loan
payments, equity stripping, and foreclosure.
Burdened by significant financial needs, welfare recipients need
practical information on the fundamentals of saving, household
budgeting, taxes, and credit. With this knowledge, individuals will be
better equipped to move toward self-sufficiency and maintain financial
independence.
The TANF Financial Education Promotion Act makes strides in financial
literacy for welfare recipients by requiring states to use TANF funds
to collaborate with community-based organizations, banks, and community
colleges to create financial education programs for low-income families
receiving welfare and for those transitioning from welfare to work.
I am not alone in advocating financial literacy for TANF recipients.
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has said, ``Educational and
training programs may be the most critical service offered by
community-based organizations to enhance the ability of lower-income
households to accumulate assets.''
I urge my colleagues to join me in helping the most vulnerable
families in the United States get access to the tools they will need to
successfully make the transition from welfare to work.
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. 923
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 ``TANF Financial Education
Promotion Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Most recipients of assistance under the Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Program established
under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) and individuals moving toward self-
sufficiency operate outside the financial mainstream, paying
high costs to handle their finances and saving little for
emergencies or the future.
(2) Currently, personal debt levels and bankruptcy filing
rates are high and savings rates are at their lowest levels
in 70 years. The inability of many households to budget,
save, and invest prevents them from laying the foundation for
a secure financial future.
(3) Financial planning can help families meet near-term
obligations and maximize their longer-term well being,
especially valuable for populations that have traditionally
been underserved by our financial system.
(4) Financial education can give individuals the necessary
financial tools to create household budgets, initiate savings
plans, and acquire assets.
(5) Financial education can prevent vulnerable customers
from becoming entangled in financially devastating credit
arrangements.
(6) Financial education that addresses abusive lending
practices targeted at specific neighborhoods or vulnerable
segments of the population can prevent unaffordable payments,
equity stripping, and foreclosure.
(7) Financial education speaks to the broader purpose of
the TANF Program to equip individuals with the tools to
succeed and support themselves and their families in self-
sufficiency.
SEC. 3. REQUIREMENT TO PROMOTE FINANCIAL EDUCATION UNDER
TANF.
(a) State Plan.--Section 402(a)(1)(A) of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 602(a)(1)(A)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(vii) Establish goals and take action to promote
financial education, as defined in section 407(j), among
parents and caretakers receiving assistance under the program
through collaboration with community-based organizations,
financial institutions, and the Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service of the Department of
Agriculture.''.
[[Page S4419]]
(b) Inclusion of Financial Education as a Work Activity.--
Section 407 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C 607) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (c)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``or (12)'' and
inserting ``(12), or (13)''; and
(B) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``or (12)'' each place
it appears and inserting ``(12), or (13)'';
(2) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (11), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in paragraph (12), by striking the period and inserting
``; and''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(13) financial education, as defined in subsection
(j).''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(j) Definition of Financial Education.--In this part, the
term `financial education' means education that promotes an
understanding of consumer, economic, and personal finance
concepts, including the basic principles involved with
earning, budgeting, spending, saving, investing, and
taxation.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
take effect on October 1, 2005.
______
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Lautenberg, Mr. Sarbanes, and Mr. Baucus):
S. 924. A bill to establish a grant program to enhance the financial
and retirement literacy of mid-life and older Americans to reduce
financial abuse and fraud among such Americans, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I would like to speak today about an
issue that I believe should be a lifelong goal for all Americans--
financial literacy.
More specifically, I want to highlight the necessity of financial
literacy for men and women who are close to retirement. Senior citizens
are too often the victims of predatory mortgage and lending abuses and
other financial scams. AARP surveys show that over half of
telemarketing fraud victims are age 50 or older. In fact, financial
exploitation is the largest single category of abuse against older
persons. It is clear that the vulnerability of this population stems
from a lack of financial knowledge, so it is more important than ever
that this Congress take steps to increase the availability of financial
education for midlife and senior citizens.
Not only does poor financial literacy leave older Americans
vulnerable to financial fraud, but it also leads to poor retirement
planning. In the next thirty years, the number of Americans over the
age of 65 will double. For many of these Americans, Social Security
alone will be insufficient to cover all their expenses, particularly as
health care costs rise. Only about half of American workers are
currently participating in any pension plan, leaving more than 75
million Americans without an employer-sponsored pension. Even worse is
the fact that fifty million Americans have no retirement savings
whatsoever. These statistics are frightening. As our population lives
longer, we must focus on retirement education for mid-life and aging
Americans as well as consumer education for seniors.
My legislation, the Education for Retirement Security Act will
address the need for financial literacy among seniors by creating a
$100 million competitive grant program that would provide resources to
State and area agencies on aging, and nonprofit community based
organizations, to provide financial education to mid-life and older
Americans. The goal of this education is to enhance these individuals'
financial and retirement knowledge and reduce their vulnerability to
financial abuse and fraud, including telemarketing, mortgage, and
pension fraud. The bill also creates a national technical assistance
program that will designate at least one national grantee to provide
financial education materials and training to local grantees.
I am proud to be reintroducing this legislation during the month of
April, which is Financial Literacy Month.
We must offer those individuals who are close to or in retirement the
tools they will need to make sound financial decisions and prepare
appropriately for their retirement. The Education for Retirement
Security Act will help older Americans learn how to avoid scams and
invest well. With savvy financial planning and smart consumer skills,
senior citizens will be more empowered to protect themselves and
ultimately be better able to enjoy a more secure retirement.
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. 924
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 ``Education for Retirement
Security Act of 2005''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) Improving financial literacy is a critical and complex
task for Americans of all ages.
(2) Low levels of savings and high levels of personal and
real estate debt are serious problems for many households
nearing retirement.
(3) Only 53 percent of working Americans have any form of
pension coverage. Three out of four women aged 65 or over
receive no income from employer-provided pensions.
(4) The more limited timeframe that mid-life and older
individuals and families have to assess the realities of
their individual circumstances, to recover from counter-
productive choices and decisionmaking processes, and to
benefit from more informed financial practices, has immediate
impact and near term consequences for Americans nearing or of
retirement age.
(5) Research indicates that there are now 4 basic sources
of retirement income security. Those sources are social
security benefits, pensions and savings, healthcare insurance
coverage, and, for an increasing number of older individuals,
necessary earnings from working during one's ``retirement''
years.
(6) Over the next 30 years, the number of older individuals
in the United States is expected to double, from 35,000,000
to nearly 75,000,000, and long-term care costs are expected
to skyrocket.
(7) Financial exploitation is the largest single category
of abuse against older individuals and this population
comprises more than \1/2\ of all telemarketing victims in the
United States.
(8) The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Identity Theft Data
Clearinghouse has reported that incidents of identity theft
targeting individuals over the age of 60 increased from 1,821
victims in 2000 to 21,084 victims in 2004, an increase of
more than 11 times in number.
SEC. 3. GRANT PROGRAM TO ENHANCE FINANCIAL AND RETIREMENT
LITERACY AND REDUCE FINANCIAL ABUSE AND FRAUD
AMONG MID-LIFE AND OLDER AMERICANS.
(a) Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to award grants
to eligible entities to provide financial education programs
to mid-life and older individuals who reside in local
communities in order to--
(1) enhance financial and retirement knowledge among such
individuals; and
(2) reduce financial abuse and fraud, including
telemarketing, mortgage, and pension fraud, among such
individuals.
(b) Eligible Entities.--An entity is eligible to receive a
grant under this section if such entity is--
(1) a State agency or area agency on aging; or
(2) a nonprofit organization with a proven record of
providing--
(A) services to mid-life and older individuals;
(B) consumer awareness programs; or
(C) supportive services to low-income families.
(c) Application.--An eligible entity desiring a grant under
this section shall submit an application to the Secretary in
such form and containing such information as the Secretary
may require, including a plan for continuing the programs
provided with grant funds under this section after the grant
expires.
(d) Limitation on Administrative Costs.--A recipient of a
grant under this section may not use more than 4 percent of
the total amount of the grant in each fiscal year for the
administrative costs of carrying out the programs provided
with grant funds under this section.
(e) Evaluation and Report.--
(1) Establishment of performance measures.--The Secretary
shall develop measures to evaluate the programs provided with
grant funds under this section.
(2) Evaluation according to performance measures.--Applying
the performance measures developed under paragraph (1), the
Secretary shall evaluate the programs provided with grant
funds under this section in order to--
(A) judge the performance and effectiveness of such
programs;
(B) identify which programs represent the best practices of
entities developing such programs for mid-life and older
individuals; and
(C) identify which programs may be replicated.
(3) Annual reports.--For each fiscal year in which a grant
is awarded under this section, the Secretary shall submit a
report to Congress containing a description of the status of
the grant program under this section, a description of the
programs provided with grant funds under this section, and
the results of the evaluation of such programs under
paragraph (2).
[[Page S4420]]
SEC. 4. NATIONAL TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
(a) Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to award a
grant to 1 or more eligible entities to--
(1) create and make available instructional materials and
information that promote financial education; and
(2) provide training and other related assistance regarding
the establishment of financial education programs to eligible
entities awarded a grant under section 3.
(b) Eligible Entities.--An entity is eligible to receive a
grant under this section if such entity is a national
nonprofit organization with substantial experience in the
field of financial education.
(c) Application.--An eligible entity desiring a grant under
this section shall submit an application to the Secretary in
such form and containing such information as the Secretary
may require.
(d) Basis and Term.--The Secretary shall award a grant
under this section on a competitive, merit basis for a term
of 5 years.
SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Financial education.--The term ``financial education''
means education that promotes an understanding of consumer,
economic, and personal finance concepts, including saving for
retirement, long-term care, and estate planning and education
on predatory lending and financial abuse schemes.
(2) Mid-life individual.--The term ``mid-life individual''
means an individual aged 45 to 64 years.
(3) Older individual.--The term ``older individual'' means
an individual aged 65 or older.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Health and Human Services.
SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) Authorization.--There are authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this Act, $100,000,000 for each of the fiscal
years 2006 through 2010.
(b) Limitation on Funds for Evaluation and Report.--The
Secretary may not use more than $200,000 of the amounts
appropriated under subsection (a) for each fiscal year to
carry out section 3(e).
(c) Limitation on Funds for Training and Technical
Assistance.--The Secretary may not use less than 5 percent or
more than 10 percent of amounts appropriated under subsection
(a) for each fiscal year to carry out section 4.
______
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Stabenow, Mr.
Lautenberg, and Mr. Baucus):
S. 925. A bill to promote youth financial education; to the Committee
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Youth
Financial Education Act. I am pleased to introduce this bill during the
month of April--Financial Literacy Month.
It is hard to underestimate the importance of financial literacy for
our youth. As credit, banking, and financial systems in this country
become more and more complex, it is time to make sure that our
education system teaches our children the fundamental principles of
earning, spending, saving and investing, so that they can be successful
citizens. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said himself that
``Improving basic financial education at the elementary and secondary
school levels is essential to providing a foundation for financial
literacy that can help prevent younger people from making poor
financial decisions.'' It is crucial not only for the well-being of our
children, but for the future of our society as a whole that all
citizens understand how to manage a checking account, use a credit
card, and estimate their taxes.
According to the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial
Literacy's Survey of High School Seniors, which measures students'
aptitude and ability to manage financial resources such as credit
cards, insurance, retirement funds and savings accounts, only 52.3
percent of students answered the survey questions correctly. In less
than a year, 54 percent of these students who go onto college will
carry a credit card. These statistics make it evident that we must do
more to arm our youth with the tools they need to make informed
decisions about the fiscal realities they will face upon entering
college or the workforce.
In 2004, only 7 states required students to complete a course that
includes personal finance before graduating from high school. In my
home State of New Jersey, New Egypt High School is the only school that
requires a course financial education. Several years ago I had the
pleasure of teaching a class of these students, and came away impressed
with their knowledge and competency in financial matters.
While awareness of the importance of financial literacy is improving,
it is still not being addressed appropriately in schools. Our schools
must prepare our children to succeed in every way, including in their
financial decisions.
I am pleased that I successfully added a provision to the No Child
Left Behind Act giving elementary and secondary schools access to funds
that will allow them to include financial education as part of their
basic educational curriculum. Although this was an important step in
the right direction, Congress can and should do more to address this
Issue.
The legislation I am introducing today will provide grants to States
to help them develop and implement financial education programs in
elementary and secondary schools. These programs will offer
professional development for teachers and prepare them to provide
financial education. It would also establish a national clearinghouse
for instructional materials and information regarding model financial
education programs.
Earlier this year, the Senate debated the Bankruptcy Reform Bill that
seeks to change the rules governing bankruptcy. While I agree that
bankruptcy reform should provide an incentive for capable individuals
to honor their financial obligations, this legislation will make it
that much more difficult for people who have fallen into debt to
declare bankruptcy. With these reforms imminent, it will be all the
more critical to take a proactive approach to the problem of personal
debt in this country and make sure that the next generation learns how
to better manage their money.
I ask for my colleagues to join me in support of the Youth Financial
Education Act, which will equip our nation's youth with skills to
become responsible consumers and enjoy economic security as well as
economic opportunity in their futures.
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. 925
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PROMOTING YOUTH FINANCIAL LITERACY.
Title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``PART D--PROMOTING YOUTH FINANCIAL LITERACY
``SEC. 4401. SHORT TITLE AND FINDINGS.
``(a) Short Title.--This part may be cited as the `Youth
Financial Education Act'.
``(b) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
``(1) In order to succeed in our dynamic American economy,
young people must obtain the skills, knowledge, and
experience necessary to manage their personal finances and
obtain general financial literacy. All young adults should
have the educational tools necessary to make informed
financial decisions.
``(2) Despite the critical importance of financial literacy
to young people, the average student who graduates from high
school lacks basic skills in the management of personal
financial affairs. A nationwide survey conducted in 2004 by
the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy
examined the financial knowledge of 4,074 12th graders. On
average, survey respondents answered only 52 percent of the
questions correctly. This figure is up only slightly from the
50 percent average score in 2002.
``(3) An evaluation by the National Endowment for Financial
Education High School Financial Planning Program undertaken
jointly with the United States Department of Agriculture
Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service
demonstrates that as little as 10 hours of classroom
instruction can impart substantial knowledge and affect
significant change in how teens handle their money.
``(4) State educational leaders have recognized the
importance of providing a basic financial education to
students in kindergarten through grade 12 by integrating
financial education into State educational standards, but by
2004, only 7 States required students to complete a course
that covered personal finance before graduating from high
school.
``(5) Teacher training and professional development are
critical to achieving youth financial literacy. Teachers
should be given the tools they need to educate our Nation's
youth on personal finance and economics.
``(6) Personal financial education helps prepare students
for the workforce and for financial independence by
developing their sense of individual responsibility,
improving their life skills, and providing them with a
[[Page S4421]]
thorough understanding of consumer economics that will
benefit them for their entire lives.
``(7) Financial education integrates instruction in
valuable life skills with instruction in economics, including
income and taxes, money management, investment and spending,
and the importance of personal savings.
``(8) The consumers and investors of tomorrow are in our
schools today. The teaching of personal finance should be
encouraged at all levels of our Nation's educational system,
from kindergarten through grade 12.
``SEC. 4402. STATE GRANT PROGRAM.
``(a) Program Authorized.--The Secretary is authorized to
provide grants to State educational agencies to develop and
integrate youth financial education programs for students in
elementary schools and secondary schools.
``(b) State Plan.--
``(1) Approved state plan required.--To be eligible to
receive a grant under this section, a State educational
agency shall submit an application that includes a State
plan, described in paragraph (2), that is approved by the
Secretary.
``(2) State plan contents.--The State plan referred to in
paragraph (1) shall include--
``(A) a description of how the State educational agency
will use grant funds;
``(B) a description of how the programs supported by a
grant will be coordinated with other relevant Federal, State,
regional, and local programs; and
``(C) a description of how the State educational agency
will evaluate program performance.
``(c) Allocation of Funds.--
``(1) Allocation factors.--Except as otherwise provided in
paragraph (2), the Secretary shall allocate the amounts made
available to carry out this section pursuant to subsection
(a) to each State according to the relative populations in
all the States of students in kindergarten through grade 12,
as determined by the Secretary based on the most recent
satisfactory data.
``(2) Minimum allocation.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations and notwithstanding paragraph (1), a State
that has submitted a plan under subsection (b) that is
approved by the Secretary shall be allocated an amount that
is not less than $500,000 for a fiscal year.
``(3) Reallocation.--In any fiscal year an allocation under
this subsection--
``(A) for a State that has not submitted a plan under
subsection (b); or
``(B) for a State whose plan submitted under subsection (b)
has been disapproved by the Secretary;
shall be reallocated to States with approved plans under this
section in accordance with paragraph (1).
``(d) Use of Grant Funds.--
``(1) Required uses.--A grant made to a State educational
agency under this part shall be used--
``(A) to provide funds to local educational agencies and
public schools to carry out financial education programs for
students in kindergarten through grade 12 based on the
concept of achieving financial literacy through the teaching
of personal financial management skills and the basic
principles involved with earning, spending, saving, and
investing;
``(B) to carry out professional development programs to
prepare teachers and administrators for financial education;
and
``(C) to monitor and evaluate programs supported under
subparagraphs (A) and (B).
``(2) Limitation on administrative costs.--A State
educational agency receiving a grant under subsection (a) may
use not more than 4 percent of the total amount of the grant
in each fiscal year for the administrative costs of carrying
out this section.
``(e) Report to the Secretary.--Each State educational
agency receiving a grant under this section shall transmit a
report to the Secretary with respect to each fiscal year for
which a grant is received. The report shall describe the
programs supported by the grant and the results of the State
educational agency's monitoring and evaluation of such
programs.
``SEC. 4403. CLEARINGHOUSE.
``(a) Authority.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations, the Secretary shall make a grant to, or
execute a contract with, an eligible entity with substantial
experience in the field of financial education, such as the
Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy, to
establish, operate, and maintain a national clearinghouse (in
this part referred to as the `Clearinghouse') for
instructional materials and information regarding model
financial education programs and best practices.
``(b) Eligible Entity.--In this section, the term `eligible
entity' means a national nonprofit organization with a proven
record of--
``(1) cataloging youth financial literacy materials; and
``(2) providing support services and materials to schools
and other organizations that work to promote youth financial
literacy.
``(c) Application.--An eligible entity desiring to
establish, operate, and maintain the Clearinghouse shall
submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such
manner, and accompanied by such information, as the Secretary
may reasonably require.
``(d) Basis and Term.--The Secretary shall make the grant
or contract authorized under subsection (a) on a competitive,
merit basis for a term of 5 years.
``(e) Use of Funds.--The Clearinghouse shall use the funds
provided under a grant or contract made under subsection
(a)--
``(1) to maintain a repository of instructional materials
and related information regarding financial education
programs for elementary schools and secondary schools,
including kindergartens, for use by States, localities, and
the general public;
``(2) to disseminate to States, localities, and the general
public, through electronic and other means, instructional
materials and related information regarding financial
education programs for elementary schools and secondary
schools, including kindergartens; and
``(3) to the extent that resources allow, to provide
technical assistance to States, localities, and the general
public on the design, establishment, and implementation of
financial education programs for elementary schools and
secondary schools, including kindergartens.
``(f) Consultation.--The chief executive officer of the
eligible entity selected to establish and operate the
Clearinghouse shall consult with the Department of the
Treasury and the Securities Exchange Commission with respect
to its activities under subsection (e).
``(g) Submission to Clearinghouse.--Each Federal agency or
department that develops financial education programs and
instructional materials for such programs shall submit to the
Clearinghouse information on the programs and copies of the
materials.
``(h) Application of Copyright Laws.--In carrying out this
section the Clearinghouse shall comply with the provisions of
title 17 of the United States Code.
``SEC. 4404. EVALUATION AND REPORT.
``(a) Performance Measures.--The Secretary shall develop
measures to evaluate the performance of programs assisted
under sections 4402 and 4403.
``(b) Evaluation According to Performance Measures.--
Applying the performance measures developed under subsection
(a), the Secretary shall evaluate programs assisted under
sections 4402 and 4403--
``(1) to judge their performance and effectiveness;
``(2) to identify which of the programs represent the best
practices of entities developing financial education programs
for students in kindergarten through grade 12; and
``(3) to identify which of the programs may be replicated
and used to provide technical assistance to States,
localities, and the general public.
``(c) Report.--For each fiscal year for which there are
appropriations under section 4407(a), the Secretary shall
transmit a report to Congress describing the status of the
implementation of this part. The report shall include the
results of the evaluation required under subsection (b) and a
description of the programs supported under section 4402.
``SEC. 4405. DEFINITIONS.
``In this part:
``(1) Financial education.--The term `financial education'
means educational activities and experiences, planned and
supervised by qualified teachers, that enable students to
understand basic economic and consumer principles, acquire
the skills and knowledge necessary to manage personal and
household finances, and develop a range of competencies that
will enable the students to become responsible consumers in
today's complex economy.
``(2) Qualified teacher.--The term `qualified teacher'
means a teacher who holds a valid teaching certification or
is considered to be qualified by the State educational agency
in the State in which the teacher works.
``SEC. 4406. PROHIBITION.
``Nothing in this part shall be construed to authorize an
officer or employee of the Federal Government to mandate,
direct, or control a State, local educational agency, or
school's specific instructional content, curriculum, or
program of instruction, as a condition of eligibility to
receive funds under this part.
``SEC. 4407. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
``(a) Authorization.--For the purposes of carrying out this
part, there are authorized to be appropriated $100,000,000
for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010.
``(b) Limitation on Funds for Clearinghouse.--The Secretary
may use not less than 2 percent and not more than 5 percent
of amounts appropriated under subsection (a) for each fiscal
year to carry out section 4403.
``(c) Limitation on Funds for Secretary Evaluation.--The
Secretary may use not more than $200,000 from the amounts
appropriated under subsection (a) for each fiscal year to
carry out subsections (a) and (b) of section 4404.
``(d) Limitation on Administrative Costs.--Except as
necessary to carry out subsections (a) and (b) of section
4404 using amounts described in subsection (c) of this
section, the Secretary shall not use any portion of the
amounts appropriated under subsection (a) for the costs of
administering this part.''.
______
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Enzi):
S. 926. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
that the credit for producing fuel from a nonconventional source shall
apply to gas produced onshore from a formation more than 15,000 feet
deep; to the Committee on Finance.
[[Page S4422]]
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President, today I proudly rise to introduce The
Natural Gas Production Act of 2005.
One of the challenges facing our economy is increasing energy prices.
Take, for example, natural gas that accounts for 22 percent of American
energy consumption. According to the Energy Information Administration,
over the next 20 years, U.S. natural gas consumption will increase by
over 50 percent. At the same time, U.S. natural gas production will
only grow by 14 percent. At a time when natural gas prices are already
at an all time high, it is critical that we increase our supply by
developing our domestic natural gas.
This legislation will provide an incentive to increase the supply of
domestically produced natural gas, which in turn will help alleviate
high natural gas prices.
The Natural Gas Production Act of 2005 will add natural gas produced
from formations more than 15,000 feet deep (Deep Gas), to the list of
qualifying fuels for the Section 29 non-conventional tax credit.
Experts consider deep gas drilling at more than 15,000 feet to be a
non-conventional source of energy production.
Studies show the resource potential below 15,000 feet for natural gas
is great. The Department of Energy's Strategic Center for Natural Gas
has estimated there to be 130 trillion cubic feet below 15,000 feet in
the lower 48. In comparison, that is equal to the proven and potential
reserves on the Alaskan North Slope.
While these vast reserves remain, very little production is occurring
from depths greater than 15,000. Deep gas wells require a considerable
amount of time and money. On average these wells cost more than $6.1
million, and for wells deeper than 20,000 feet costs can exceed $16
million. Add to that the minimum one-year and longer drilling time and
you can clearly see that Federal drilling incentives are needed to help
promote and speed production of this enormous potential resource.
To drill a deep well, a drilling rig will employ about 25 people
directly. In 1979, 128 deep well completions in Oklahoma created 2,630
jobs. In addition to direct jobs, economists estimate that 60 to 75
indirect jobs will be created as well.
Due to changes in the regulatory governance of the industry and
cyclical market conditions over the next two and one-half decades, deep
drilling activity all across the country has declined substantially.
I am introducing this legislation, along with Senator Vitter, today
to encourage more domestic production in an area of proven reserves
that will increase our supply. I thank Senator Vitter for his work and
I urge members to support us in this effort. I ask consent that the
text of the bill be printed in the Record.
If you have any questions, please contact Mike Ference on my Staff at
224-1036.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 926
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 ``Natural Gas Production Act
of 2005''.
SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR PRODUCING FUEL FROM NONCONVENTIONAL SOURCE
TO APPLY TO GAS PRODUCED ONSHORE FROM
FORMATIONS MORE THAN 15,000 FEET DEEP.
(a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 29(c)(1) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified fuels)
is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of clause (i), by
striking ``and'' at the end of clause (ii) and inserting
``or'', and by inserting after clause (ii) the following new
clause:
``(iii) an onshore well from a formation more than 15,000
feet deep, and''.
(b) Eligible Wells.--Section 29 of such Code is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(h) Eligible Deep Gas Wells.--In the case of a well
producing qualified fuel described in subsection (B)(iii)--
``(1) for purposes of subsection (f)(1)(A), such well shall
be treated as drilled before January 1, 1993, if such well is
drilled after the date of the enactment of this subsection,
and
``(2) subsection (f)(2) shall not apply.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years ending after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. CORZINE (for himself, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr.
Johnson, Ms. Landrieu, and Mr. Kennedy):
S. 927. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
expand and improve coverage of mental health services under the
medicare program; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a very
important piece of legislation, the Medicare Mental Health
Modernization Act of 2005.
Our Nation's Medicare beneficiaries--our elderly and disabled
population--have limited access to mental health services. Medicare
restricts the types of mental health services available to
beneficiaries and the types of providers who are allowed to offer such
care. It also charges higher copayments for mental health services than
it does for all other health care. In order to receive mental health
care, seniors and the disabled must pay 50 percent of the cost of a
visit to their mental health specialist, as opposed to the 20 percent
that they pay for other services. Medicare also limits the number of
days a beneficiary can receive mental health care in a hospital setting
to 190 days over an individual's lifetime.
We must address this problem. The need is glaring. Almost 20 percent
of Americans over age 65 have a serious mental disorder. They suffer
from depression, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, anxiety, late-life
schizophrenia and, all too often, substance abuse. These are serious
illnesses that must be treated. Unfortunately, they are often
unidentified by primary care physicians, or the appropriate services
are simply out of reach. Americans age 65 and older have the highest
rate of suicide of any other population in the United States. An
alarming 70 percent of elderly suicide victims have visited their
primary care doctor in the month prior to committing suicide.
Medicare is also the primary source of health insurance for millions
of nonelderly disabled. More than 20 percent of these individuals
suffer from mental illness and/or addiction. This very needy population
faces the same discrimination in their mental health coverage.
As our population ages, the burden of mental illness on seniors,
their families, and the health care system will only continue increase.
Experts estimate that by the year 2030, 15 million people over 65 will
have psychiatric disorders, with the number of individuals suffering
from Alzheimer's disease doubling. If we do not reform the Medicare
program to provide greater access to detection and treatment of mental
illness, the cost of not treating these diseases will rapidly escalate.
Without the appropriate outpatient mental health services, too many of
our seniors are forced into nursing homes and hospitals. If We truly
want to modernize Medicare and make it more efficient, we must provide
access to these services. Not only will they likely reduce costs in the
long term, but they will also increase Medicare beneficiaries' quality
of life.
The Medicare Mental Health Modernization Act takes critical steps to
address these issues. First, the bill reduces the 50 percent copayment
for mental health services to 20 percent. The proposed 20 percent
copayment is the same as the copayment for all other outpatient
services in Medicare. Second, the bill would provide access to
intensive residential services for those who are suffering from severe
mental illness. This will give people with Alzheimer's disease and
other serious mental illness the opportunity to be cared for in their
homes or in community-based settings. Third, the bill expands the
number of qualified mental health professionals eligible to provide
services through the Medicare program. This includes licensed
professional mental health counselors, clinical social workers, and
marriage and family therapists. This expansion of qualified providers
is critical to ensuring that seniors throughout the nation,
particularly those in rural areas, are able to receive the services
they need.
In closing, I urge all of my colleagues to step forward to support
the Medicare Mental Health Modernization Act of 2005. It is time for
the Medicare program to stop discriminating against seniors and the
disabled who are suffering from mental illness.
______
By Mrs. LINCOLN:
S. 928. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
for the
[[Page S4423]]
immediate and permanent repeal of the estate tax on family-owned
businesses and farms, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Finance.
Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, four years ago, as projected budget
surpluses reached over $5 trillion, Congress passed a tax cut bill that
began the process of addressing the unfairness of the estate tax. Now
in 2005, the surpluses have long since disappeared, and Congress has
made no further progress on estate tax relief for America's family-
owned farms and businesses--many of whom still pay this tax today.
Earlier this month, the House once again voted for a complete repeal
of the estate tax. I myself have consistently supported complete
repeal, I have voted in favor of full repeal on multiple occasions, and
I will continue to support full repeal should that option be brought to
the floor of the U.S. Senate for a vote in the future. Nevertheless,
given the persistent state of our more than $400 billion annual
deficits, it is increasingly doubtful such a bill could obtain the
necessary votes in the Senate for passage right now.
I'm not alone in feeling that the votes just aren't there for full
repeal. President of the U.S. Chamber, Tom Donahue, was quoted this
week stating that the Chamber would likely support a good compromise
coming out of the Senate. We all understand the state of affairs and I
want to echo Mr. Donahue's sentiments. We must work together to bring
relief to those that this tax affects most--family-owned farms and
businesses.
It is the family-owned farms and businesses across Arkansas and all
across this Nation that serve as the backbone of our rural communities.
To put it simply, they are the economic engines of rural America. It is
the family-owned businesses that provide jobs, wages, and health care
for my constituents. It is the family-owned businesses that sponsor
Little League, they pay local taxes, they are a part of the community.
They live there. And that's why family-owned businesses aren't the ones
that are shutting down and heading off-shore. When we force family
businesses to spend valuable assets on estate planning and life
insurance rather than on investing and expanding their businesses, we
are putting them at a disadvantage to their publically-traded
competitors. I, for one, intend to fight for these family businesses,
fight for these communities, and fight for the jobs in rural America.
In the wake of the House vote and the real lack of votes here in the
Senate to pass a complete repeal bill, talk of compromise has raised
speculation of higher exemptions and/or lower tax rates as an
alternative to complete repeal.
Quite frankly, I believe these compromise approaches are incomplete
solutions to the problems faced by family-owned farms and businesses.
Certainly, I understand that a higher exemption and lower rates will be
considered as part of a compromise. But both are expensive and
inefficient methods to specifically reach family-owned farms and
businesses.
Given the restraints of our budget deficits today, I ask, how can we
raise the exemption high enough, or lower the rates low enough, to
provide necessary relief for family farms and businesses?
We could not get there in 2001 when projected surpluses reached $5
trillion. What makes us think we can solve this problem today with
projected deficits totaling $2.6 trillion in the President's budget?
We took these approaches in 2001, and family-owned farms and
businesses still face this tax today, so we should be leery of any
compromise approach that considers only rates and exemptions. They were
incomplete compromise solutions then--and they will be tomorrow.
In this environment, I feel we are seriously losing ground on coming
to a fair and final resolution of this issue. In the meantime, the
current state of the law places many family-owned businesses in an
extremely uncertain and precarious position--a law that taxes family-
owned businesses today, then repeals the tax in 2010, and then snaps
back to pre-2001 law in 2011 is simply not responsible on our part.
This amounts to nothing more than a nightmarish rollercoaster ride for
the businesses we intended to help!
So, we need to set some priorities and go about the business of
lifting this tax from these family-owned farms and businesses first.
On the subject of setting priorities, I would like to relay a
statistic that may startle my colleagues a bit. The IRS Statistics of
Income for 2003 show that only 7.4 percent of the estate tax is paid on
``farm assets, closely held stock, or other non-corporate business
assets.'' These 7.4 percent should be our first priority in any
compromise the estate tax. The remaining 92.6 percent of assets--such
as widely-held stock, bonds, insurance proceeds, art, and real estate
partnerships--should not drive or dictate our actions at the expense of
America's family-owned farms and businesses.
This simple statistic helps lead us to a targeted solution which
should cost less and immediately help those we intended to help in the
first place. Today, I introduce the ``Estate Tax Repeal Acceleration
for Family-Owned Businesses and Farms Act''--or ExTRA. Under ExTRA, an
estate may voluntarily elect to exclude an unlimited portion of family
business assets from the estate tax. The carryover basis rules will
apply to these business assets and no estate tax will be paid on them.
That is the same deal that repeal promises--but we do so immediately
and permanently--and at a fraction of the cost.
My bill does not seek to change current law to repeal the estate tax.
It would leave in place the scheduled increases in the unified credit,
the decreases in rates, and the repeal of the estate tax in 2010. My
bill would only seek to rectify the special circumstances of family-
owned businesses and farms, in an attempt, not to inflame the issue
further, but to resolve this issue now and forever for those this
effort was originally intended to help.
The goal of the Lincoln bill is that no family-owned farm or business
will ever pay the estate tax. Americans are driven to build their lives
and their communities and they want to be able to pass that on to the
next generation. What comes of the American dream if someone works hard
all their life to build something to pass on to their family, their
legacy, and it has to be sold for taxes.
If there is an idea that will protect the American dream and the
family-owned business, we should not be reluctant to put it on the
table. Today, I am introducing such an idea, and I firmly believe such
an approach must be part of any compromise if one is reached. In fact,
I will not support any compromise that does not take care of family
businesses in Arkansas.
I urge my colleagues to take a look and study the Lincoln bill to
immediately and permanently repeal the estate tax for family owned
farms and businesses.
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. 928
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 ``Estate Tax Repeal
Acceleration (ExTRA) for Family-Owned Businesses and Farms
Act''.
SEC. 2. REPEAL OF ESTATE TAX ON FAMILY-OWNED BUSINESSES AND
FARMS.
(a) Carryover Business Interest Exclusion.--Part IV of
subchapter A of chapter 11 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 (relating to taxable estate) is amended by inserting
after section 2058 the following new section:
``SEC. 2059. CARRYOVER BUSINESS INTERESTS.
``(a) General Rules.--
``(1) Allowance of deduction.--For purposes of the tax
imposed by section 2001, in the case of an estate of a
decedent to which this section applies, the value of the
taxable estate shall be determined by deducting from the
value of the gross estate the adjusted value of the carryover
business interests of the decedent which are described in
subsection (b)(2).
``(2) Application of carryover basis rules.--With respect
to the adjusted value of the carryover business interests of
the decedent which are described in subsection (b)(2), the
rules of section 1023 shall apply.
``(b) Estates to Which Section Applies.--
``(1) In general.--This section shall apply to an estate
if--
``(A) the decedent was (at the date of the decedent's
death) a citizen or resident of the United States,
[[Page S4424]]
``(B) the executor elects the application of this section
under rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (1) and (3) of
section 2032A(d) and files the agreement referred to in
subsection (e), and
``(C) during the 8-year period ending on the date of the
decedent's death there have been periods aggregating 5 years
or more during which--
``(i) the carryover business interests described in
paragraph (2) were owned by the decedent or a member of the
decedent's family, and
``(ii) there was material participation (within the meaning
of section 2032A(e)(6)) by the decedent, a member of the
decedent's family, or a qualified heir in the operation of
the business to which such interests relate.
``(2) Includible carryover business interests.--The
carryover business interests described in this paragraph are
the interests which--
``(A) are included in determining the value of the gross
estate,
``(B) are acquired by any qualified heir from, or passed to
any qualified heir from, the decedent (within the meaning of
section 2032A(e)(9)), and
``(C) are subject to the election under paragraph (1)(B).
``(3) Rules regarding material participation.--For purposes
of paragraph (1)(C)(ii)--
``(A) in the case a surviving spouse, material
participation by such spouse may be satisfied under rules
similar to the rules under section 2032A(b)(5),
``(B) in the case of a carryover business interest in an
entity carrying on multiple trades or businesses, material
participation in each trade or business is satisfied by
material participation in the entity or in 1 or more of the
multiple trades or businesses, and
``(C) in the case of a lending and finance business (as
defined in section 6166(b)(10)(B)(ii)), material
participation is satisfied under the rules under subclause
(I) or (II) of section 6166(b)(10)(B)(i).
``(c) Adjusted Value of the Carryover Business Interests.--
For purposes of this section--
``(1) In general.--The adjusted value of any carryover
business interest is the value of such interest for purposes
of this chapter (determined without regard to this section),
as adjusted under paragraph (2).
``(2) Adjustment for previous transfers.--The Secretary may
increase the value of any carryover business interest by that
portion of those assets transferred from such carryover
business interest to the decedent's taxable estate within 3
years before the date of the decedent's death.
``(d) Carryover Business Interest.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the term
`carryover business interest' means--
``(A) an interest as a proprietor in a trade or business
carried on as a proprietorship, or
``(B) an interest in an entity carrying on a trade or
business, if--
``(i) at least--
``(I) 50 percent of such entity is owned (directly or
indirectly) by the decedent and members of the decedent's
family,
``(II) 70 percent of such entity is so owned by members of
2 families, or
``(III) 90 percent of such entity is so owned by members of
3 families, and
``(ii) for purposes of subclause (II) or (III) of clause
(i), at least 30 percent of such entity is so owned by the
decedent and members of the decedent's family.
For purposes of the preceding sentence, a decedent shall be
treated as engaged in a trade or business if any member of
the decedent's family is engaged in such trade or business.
``(2) Lending and finance business.--For purposes of this
section, any asset used in a lending and finance business (as
defined in section 6166(b)(10)(B)(ii)) shall be treated as an
asset which is used in carrying on a trade or business.
``(3) Limitation.--Such term shall not include--
``(A) any interest in a trade or business the principal
place of business of which is not located in the United
States,
``(B) any interest in an entity, if the stock or debt of
such entity or a controlled group (as defined in section
267(f)(1)) of which such entity was a member was readily
tradable on an established securities market or secondary
market (as defined by the Secretary) at any time,
``(C) that portion of an interest in an entity transferred
by gift to such interest within 3 years before the date of
the decedent's death, and
``(D) that portion of an interest in an entity which is
attributable to cash or marketable securities, or both, in
any amount in excess of the reasonably anticipated business
needs of such entity.
In any proceeding before the United States Tax Court
involving a notice of deficiency based in whole or in part on
the allegation that cash or marketable securities, or both,
are accumulated in an amount in excess of the reasonably
anticipated business needs of such entity, the burden of
proof with respect to such allegation shall be on the
Secretary to the extent such cash or marketable securities
are less than 35 percent of the value of the interest in such
entity.
``(4) Rules regarding ownership.--
``(A) Ownership of entities.--For purposes of paragraph
(1)(B)--
``(i) Corporations.--Ownership of a corporation shall be
determined by the holding of stock possessing the appropriate
percentage of the total combined voting power of all classes
of stock entitled to vote and the appropriate percentage of
the total value of shares of all classes of stock.
``(ii) Partnerships.--Ownership of a partnership shall be
determined by the owning of the appropriate percentage of the
capital interest in such partnership.
``(B) Ownership of tiered entities.--For purposes of this
section, if by reason of holding an interest in a trade or
business, a decedent, any member of the decedent's family,
any qualified heir, or any member of any qualified heir's
family is treated as holding an interest in any other trade
or business--
``(i) such ownership interest in the other trade or
business shall be disregarded in determining if the ownership
interest in the first trade or business is a carryover
business interest, and
``(ii) this section shall be applied separately in
determining if such interest in any other trade or business
is a carryover business interest.
``(C) Individual ownership rules.--For purposes of this
section, an interest owned, directly or indirectly, by or for
an entity described in paragraph (1)(B) shall be considered
as being owned proportionately by or for the entity's
shareholders, partners, or beneficiaries. A person shall be
treated as a beneficiary of any trust only if such person has
a present interest in such trust.
``(e) Agreement.--The agreement referred to in this
subsection is a written agreement signed by each person in
being who has an interest (whether or not in possession) in
any property designated in such agreement consenting to the
application of this section with respect to such property.
``(f) Other Definitions and Applicable Rules.--For purposes
of this section--
``(1) Qualified heir.--The term `qualified heir' means a
United States citizen who is--
``(A) described in section 2032A(e)(1), or
``(B) an active employee of the trade or business to which
the carryover business interest relates if such employee has
been employed by such trade or business for a period of at
least 10 years before the date of the decedent's death.
``(2) Member of the family.--The term `member of the
family' has the meaning given to such term by section
2032A(e)(2).
``(3) Applicable rules.--Rules similar to the following
rules shall apply:
``(A) Section 2032A(b)(4) (relating to decedents who are
retired or disabled).
``(B) Section 2032A(e)(10) (relating to community
property).
``(C) Section 2032A(e)(14) (relating to treatment of
replacement property acquired in section 1031 or 1033
transactions).
``(D) Section 2032A(g) (relating to application to
interests in partnerships, corporations, and trusts).
``(4) Safe harbor for active entities held by entity
carrying on a trade or business.--For purposes of this
section, if--
``(A) an entity carrying on a trade or business owns 20
percent or more in value of the voting interests of another
entity, or such other entity has 15 or fewer owners, and
``(B) 80 percent or more of the value of the assets of each
such entity is attributable to assets used in an active
business operation, then the requirements under subsections
(b)(1)(C)(ii) and (d)(3)(D) shall be met with respect to an
interest in such an entity.''.
(b) Carryover Basis Rules for Carryover Business
Interests.--Part II of subchapter O of chapter 1 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to basis rules of
general application) is amended by inserting after section
1022 the following new section:
``SEC. 1023. TREATMENT OF CARRYOVER BUSINESS INTERESTS.
``(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided in this
section--
``(1) qualified property acquired from a decedent shall be
treated for purposes of this subtitle as transferred by gift,
and
``(2) the basis of the person acquiring qualified property
from such a decedent shall be the lesser of--
``(A) the adjusted basis of the decedent, or
``(B) the fair market value of the property at the date of
the decedent's death.
``(b) Qualified Property.--For purposes of this section,
the term `qualified property' means the carryover business
interests of the decedent with respect to which an election
is made under section 2059(b)(1)(B).
``(c) Property Acquired From the Decedent.--For purposes of
this section, the following property shall be considered to
have been acquired from the decedent:
``(1) Property acquired by bequest, devise, or inheritance,
or by the decedent's estate from the decedent.
``(2) Property transferred by the decedent during his
lifetime--
``(A) to a qualified revocable trust (as defined in section
645(b)(1)), or
``(B) to any other trust with respect to which the decedent
reserved the right to make any change in the enjoyment
thereof through the exercise of a power to alter, amend, or
terminate the trust.
``(3) Any other property passing from the decedent by
reason of death to the extent that such property passed
without consideration.
``(d) Coordination With Section 691.--This section shall
not apply to property which constitutes a right to receive an
item of income in respect of a decedent under section 691.
``(e) Certain Liabilities Disregarded.--
``(1) In general.--In determining whether gain is
recognized on the acquisition of property--
[[Page S4425]]
``(A) from a decedent by a decedent's estate or any
beneficiary other than a tax-exempt beneficiary, and
``(B) from the decedent's estate by any beneficiary other
than a tax-exempt beneficiary, and in determining the
adjusted basis of such property, liabilities in excess of
basis shall be disregarded.
``(2) Tax-exempt beneficiary.--For purposes of paragraph
(1), the term `tax-exempt beneficiary' means--
``(A) the United States, any State or political subdivision
thereof, any possession of the United States, any Indian
tribal government (within the meaning of section 7871), or
any agency or instrumentality of any of the foregoing,
``(B) an organization (other than a cooperative described
in section 521) which is exempt from tax imposed by chapter
1,
``(C) any foreign person or entity (within the meaning of
section 168(h)(2)), and
``(D) to the extent provided in regulations, any person to
whom property is transferred for the principal purpose of tax
avoidance.
``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of
this section.''.
(c) Clerical Amendments.--
(1) The table of sections for part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 11 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by
inserting after the item relating to section 2058 the
following new item:
``Sec. 2059. Carryover business exclusion.''.
(2) The table of sections for part II of subchapter O of
chapter 1 of such Code is amended by inserting after the item
relating to section 1022 the following new item:
``Sec. 1023. Treatment of carryover business interests.''.
(d) Effective Dates.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to estates of decedents dying, and gifts made--
(1) after the date of the enactment of this Act, and before
January 1, 2010, and
(2) after December 31, 2010.
______
By Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Coburn,
Mr. Talent, Mr. Cornyn, and Mr. Isakson):
S. 929. A bill to provide liability protection to nonprofit volunteer
pilot organizations flying for public benefit and to the pilots and
staff of such organizations; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. ALLEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of legislation that I
reintroduced today with a number of my Senate colleagues--the Volunteer
Pilot Organization Protection Act of 2005.
The spirit of volunteerism is indelibly rooted in our Nation's
history. From when early settlers landed in Jamestown in 1607 to when
our citizen soldiers took up arms against the British Crown in the
Revolutionary War, volunteerism has always been a part of American
culture.
But that unwavering spirit did not stop there, it has continued and
thrived in many individuals and charitable organizations today. One
such group of organizations that has selflessly given back so much to
Virginians and Americans are charitable medical transportation systems
operated by volunteer pilot organizations, VPOs.
The mission and purpose of public benefit and non-profit volunteer
pilot organizations involved in patient transport is to ensure that no
financially needy patient is denied access to distant specialized
medical evaluation, diagnosis or treatment for lack of a means of long-
distance medical air transportation. The principal goal is to remove
the geographical and financial burdens that would deny access to
specialized care.
Last year public benefit flying non-profit volunteer pilot
organizations provided long-distance, no-cost transportation for over
40,000 patients and their escorts in times of special need. Mr.
President, this year, that figure will likely grow to roughly 54,000
people.
One such organization that has played an intricate part in this
mission is Angel Flight. Angel Flight is a not-for-profit grassroots
organization with a volunteer corps of more than 6,200 volunteer
pilots/plane owners--divided into six regions across the United
States--who fly under the banner of Angel Flight America. Angel Flight
provides flights of hope and healing by transporting patients and their
families in private planes, free of charge, to hospitals for medical
treatment.
Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Department
of Transportation and the FAA closed airports and grounded commercial
air traffic, but the FAA allowed Angel Flight volunteers to fly. Angel
Flight pilots flew firefighters, families of victims of the bombings,
Red Cross personnel, medical and other supplies including the
protective booties for the Search and Rescue dogs to New York and
Washington, DC.
In my years of public service, I have always maintained that we must
provide access to care to all Virginians and Americans. Medical care
should be available to all individuals. Sadly, our Nation is facing a
medical crisis. Medical malpractice insurance costs and Medicare
physician reimbursement are forcing many of our doctors to stop seeing
``high-risk'' patients or Medicare beneficiaries and in some cases
forcing our doctors to give up practice altogether and retire. As a
result, patients have to travel great distances to receive the medical
care that they need to live happy, healthy and productive lives.
Unfortunately, a number of these patients do not have the financial
means to travel long distances, thus, ultimately denying patients
access to life-saving or quality of life improving specialized
treatment.
We can say the same with patients who rely on volunteer pilot
organizations such as Angel Flight or one of its subsidiary groups like
Mercy Medical Airlift in my home Commonwealth of Virginia.
Unfortunately, due to the public's apparent notion that organizations
that use airplanes are financially well-off and have deep pockets, many
of the volunteer pilot organizations are open to frivolous and junk
lawsuits. This leads to an access to care issue.
Also, aviation insurance has skyrocketed up in price and non-owned
aircraft liability insurance is no longer reasonably available to
volunteer pilot organizations. Many insurance companies had always
provided this type of insurance but post September 11, 2001, this
insurance is scarcely found and if found, the costs have increased
greatly, to the astronomical sums of $5 million a year. Because of the
exorbitant costs of insurance, volunteer pilot organizations have a
difficult time recruiting and retaining pilots and professional
persons.
I would like to submit an editorial written by the Virginian Pilot.
This editorial correctly identifies the obstacles that these volunteer
pilot organizations have to go through. I would like that editorial
inserted here.
That is why I decided to introduce the Volunteer Pilot Organization
Protection Act. In 1997, Congress passed the Volunteer Protection Act,
which handled much of the liability issue for volunteer endeavors in
the country; however, this legislation did not adequately address
aviation-related matters.
My bill amends the highly regarded Good Samaritan Act to provide
necessary liability protections in the area of charitable medical air
transportation and promote volunteer pilot organizations. More
specifically, this legislation will protect volunteer pilot
organizations, their boards and small paid staff and nonflying
volunteers from liability should there be an accident. The VPOs are
simply the ``match-makers'' between the volunteer pilot willing to help
a neighbor and the needy patient family. The pilot has full and sole
responsibility for conducting the flight in a safe manner in accordance
with Federal Aviation Regulations. In addition, this legislation will
provide liability protection for the individual volunteer pilot over
and above the liability insurance that they are required to carry.
Furthermore, the Volunteer Pilot Protection Act will provide
liability protection for ``referring agencies'' who tell their patients
that the charitable flight service is available. Referring hospitals
and clinics are becoming unwilling to inform their patients that
charitable medical air transportation help is available for fear of a
liability against them should something happen in a subsequent
volunteer pilot flight. Hence, organizations like the Shriners Hospital
System and the American Cancer Society would be able to make known
available volunteer pilot services to transport their patients to
Shriners or other hospitals where they receive care.
I know a few people have concerns that this bill would provide
blanket immunity to Volunteer Pilot Organizations but I want to stress
that my bill requires insurance on the part of the pilot and if there
is negligence on behalf of the pilot, the injured party does have legal
recourse. This bill does not provide blanket immunity to VPOs, but has
been carefully worded to allow
[[Page S4426]]
legal action to be brought against the insurance policy of the pilot in
event of negligence.
By providing volunteer pilots with liability protection, insurance
rates for these pilots will ultimately be reduced. Therefore, more
pilots will be able to afford insurance and fly for the public good.
With less-costly insurance available, I am confident that more pilots
will generously give their time to fly for and help the medically
needy.
This bill enjoys the support of a number of charitable organizations,
including the Children's Organ Transplant Association, the National
Organization for Rare Disorders, the Air Care Alliance, the Independent
Charities of America, the Health and Medical Research Charities of
America, the National Association of Hospital Hospitality Houses, and
many others.
Not only does this legislation enjoy the support of numerous
charitable organizations, it also enjoyed the support of the United
States House of Representatives. On September 14, 2004, the House of
Representatives passed the Volunteer Pilot Organization Protection Act
of2004 by a vote of 385-12. Mr. President, this is a clear indication
that this bill has broad bipartisan support in the House and I know the
House will once again pass this commonsense legislation.
I am confident that this legislation will start a trend to help curb
the large amounts of counterproductive lawsuits, lower insurance costs,
and promote the spirit of volunteerism that has been rooted in the
framework of our country's storied history. I, along with the volunteer
pilots and organizations, and with the thousands of families who rely
and may rely on the help of volunteer pilot organizations, urge the
Senate to quickly and finally pass this legislation in the 109th
Congress.
I would like to thank Congresswoman Thelma Drake, our newest member
to the Virginia team, for taking over this legislation for former
Congressman Ed Schrock and introducing the companion bill on the House
side. In addition, I would also like to thank the original cosponsors
of this legislation, Senators Chambliss, Inhofe, Coburn, Talent,
Cornyn, and Isakson for their support as we work to pass this vitally
necessary legislation.
[From the (Norfolk) Virginian-Pilot,
Mar. 11, 2003]
Shield Helpful Pilots From Frivolous Lawsuits
In the realm of volunteers, few outshine the generous folks
at Angel Flight.
This nonprofit organization flies patients for whom air
transport would be otherwise unaffordable to medical
facilities around the country. Private pilots spirit
individuals to dialysis, chemotherapy sessions, organ
transplants and other surgeries by donating their aircraft
and their valuable time. The goal is a noble one: to ensure
that no one in need is denied medical care for lack of long-
distance transportation.
But in our lawsuit-happy society, even these warmhearted
souls can't escape the possibility of landing in court. While
a law known as the Volunteer Protection Act shields most
people who give their time to worthy causes from frivolous
suits, it doesn't cover volunteer pilots or flight
organizers. Liability insurance costs for Angel Flight and
similar nonprofits have skyrocketed from $1,000 to more than
$25,000 annually.
This prohibitive price tag threatens the future of Angel
Flight, which is funded solely through donations. A
spokeswoman for Angel Flight Mid-Atlantic, headquartered in
Virginia Beach, said the burden will ultimately fall on sick
and needy patients. And with 600 volunteer pilots
transporting an average of 100 medical cases a month,
literally thousands of lives may be affected by this
oversight in the law.
Fortunately, lawmakers are paying attention. U.S. Rep. Ed
Schrock recently introduced bipartisan legislation to add
volunteer-pilot organizations to the ranks of those covered
by the Volunteer Protection Act. U.S. Sen. George Allen is
expected to introduce a similar measure in the Senate.
Congress should pass these bills, the sooner the better.
Keeping Angel Flight aloft is literally a life-and-death
matter.
______
By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Dodd):
S. 930. A bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with
respect to drug safety, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I introduce Senate Bill 930, the
Food and Drug Administration Safety Act of 2005. I am pleased that
Senator Dodd is co-sponsoring another piece of drug safety legislation
with me. This legislation is part of a sustained effort to restore
public confidence in the Federal Government's food and drug safety
agency. Enactment of this bill will be another meaningful step toward
greater accountability and transparency at the FDA. Importantly, this
legislation provides the FDA with some much needed authorities to
ensure the safety and efficacy of drugs for the long haul.
The Food and Drug Administration cannot always serve the American
people and the interests of the drug industry at the same time. These
two interests are often at odds with each other. When there is a
conflict the American people should win out each and every time. The
Vioxx situation is a classic example of this inherent conflict.
American consumers demand and deserve assurances that the medicines in
their cabinets are safe. The risks associated with a drug should be
outweighed by its benefits, and this risk-benefit analysis should not
be negotiated by the industry behind closed doors. Unfortunately,
reforms at the FDA are necessary to place drug safety front and center
once and for all.
When drugs go on the market, they are used by exponentially larger
numbers of people than were involved in the pre-approval trials. What
John Q. Public deserves and demands is for the FDA to embrace a renewed
mission to pursue aggressively key safety questions that the industry
would sometimes prefer to ignore. The FDA must protect the health of
the public by considering not only the benefits but also the risks of
drugs for the tens of millions of Americans who actually use new drugs
already available in the marketplace. The FDA's post-market evaluation
and research needs to be a separate but equal partner with pre-approval
evaluation. Indeed FDA's post marketing surveillance function can no
longer take a back seat within the agency.
I have been pressing for necessary reforms at the FDA--both
administrative and legislative--and the focus of these reforms center
on a reorganization of the FDA. The Food and Drug Administration Safety
Act of 2005 will establish an independent Center within the FDA--the
Center for Post-market Drug Evaluation and Research (CPDER). The new
Center's primary mission, vision and values will focus on conducting
risk assessment for approved drugs and biological products once they
are on the market. The Director of the Center will report directly to
the FDA Commissioner and will be responsible for monitoring and
assessing the safety and efficacy of drugs and biological products.
Today's legislation is focused on the equal importance of pre-
marketing evaluations by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
(CDER)--the pre-market Center--and post-marketing evaluations by the
newly established post-market Center. Consultation and coordination
between pre-market and post-market Centers will be essential, but their
relationship will place them on equal footing with the other. The
present Office of Drug Safety will no longer be effectively under the
thumb of the Office of New Drugs. We are hopeful that this
reorganization of the FDA will go a long way toward eliminating the
conflict of interest that shadows the FDA's post-market risk assessment
presently.
Today's legislation will also: authorize the Director to require
manufacturers to conduct post-market clinical or observational studies
if there are questions about the safety or efficacy of a drug or
biological product.
Authorize the Director to determine whether an approved drug or
licensed biological product may present an unreasonable risk to the
health of patients or the general public, given the known benefits.
Authorize the Director to take corrective action if a drug or
biological product presents an unreasonable risk to patients or the
general public--including the authority to make changes to the label or
approved indication, place restrictions on product distribution,
require physician and consumer education, and require the use of other
risk management tools.
Allow the Director to withdraw approval of a drug or biological
product if necessary to protect the public health.
Require submission of advertising prior to dissemination, and certain
advertising disclosures related to risks and benefits to patients, if
one or more
[[Page S4427]]
of the three following conditions is met: the Director has determined
that the product may present an unreasonable risk to patients, the
product is the subject of an outstanding post-market study requirement,
or the product was approved within the last two years.
Establish strong enforcement mechanisms, including civil monetary
penalties, for those who fail to comply.
Ensure that the Director benefits from all appropriate resources,
including but not limited to consultation with the Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research (CDER) or the Center for Biologics Evaluation
and Research (CBER), and makes all decisions based on a risk-benefit
analysis.
Ensure that all findings and decisions made by CPDER are transparent.
Require a report and recommendations to Congress on post-market
surveillance of medical devices.
Authorize graduated appropriations totaling $500 million over five
years to ensure that CPDER has the resources to accomplish its goals.
Today's legislation is another important step toward reforming the
FDA. I urge my colleagues to join me in this effort by cosponsoring
this important legislation.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I rise today to join Senator Grassley in
announcing the introduction of the Food and Drug Administration Safety
Act of 2005 (FDASA). I would like to thank Senator Grassley for his
commitment to this issue and his willingness to work on this important
legislation in a bipartisan manner. Senator Grassley and I have spent
the past several months crafting this legislation, which will create a
new center within the FDA that will be responsible for ensuring that
prescription drugs are safe once they are on the market.
Our hope is that the creation of this new center will restore
confidence in the medicines that so many Americans rely on to safeguard
their health and well-being. Patients should be able to rest-assured
that the drugs they take to help them will not hurt them instead.
The American pharmaceutical industry is a true success story. Their
incredible innovations over the last few decades have saved and
improved millions of lives, and made prescription drugs an integral
part of quality health care. I am proud to say that Connecticut is home
to a number of leading pharmaceutical companies. There is very little
question that the American drug industry is the world leader. This is
due, in no small part, to the FDA. Throughout the world, the FDA seal
of approval--the words ``FDA Approved''--has stood as the gold standard
for safety and quality.
Unfortunately, events of the past year have put patients at risk and
have seriously tarnished the FDA's image. Recent developments have cast
into doubt the FDA's ability to ensure that the drugs that it approves
are safe--especially once they are on the market. These concerns are
bad for patients, bad for physicians, and bad for the drug industry.
Like many Americans, I have been deeply disturbed by the revelations
of significant risk associated with widely used medications to treat
pain and depression. These revelations raise real and legitimate
questions about the safety of drugs that have already been approved. It
would be one thing if these drugs were in a trial phase, but safety
issues are being identified in drugs that are already on the market and
widely used. Health risks significant enough to remove drugs from the
market or significantly restrict their use are becoming clear only
after millions of Americans have been exposed to real or potential
harm.
It has been estimated that more than 100,000 Americans might have
been seriously injured or killed by a popular pain medication, while
millions of children have been prescribed antidepressants that could
put them at risk. This recent spate of popular medicines being
identified as unsafe underscores the need to take additional steps to
monitor and protect safety after a drug has been approved.
The legislation that Senator Grassley and I are introducing today
will do three things to restore confidence in the words ``FDA
Approved,'' and ensure that the FDA has all the tools that it needs to
protect patients. First and foremost, it will establish within the FDA
a new center--the Center for Postmarket Drug Evaluation and Research
(CPDER)--which will report directly to the FDA Commissioner and be
responsible for ensuring the safety and effectiveness of drugs and
biological products once they are on the market.
I strongly believe that the creation of such a new, independent
center is necessary. There have been disturbing reports that suggest
that the FDA does not place enough emphasis on drug safety, and that
concerns raised by those in the Office of Drug Safety (ODS) are
sometimes ignored and even suppressed. An internal study conducted by
the HHS Office of the Inspector General in 2002 revealed that
approximately one-fifth of drug reviewers had been pressured to approve
a drug despite concerns about safety, efficacy, or quality. In
addition, more than one-third said they were ``not at all'' or only
``somewhat'' confident that final decisions of the Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research (CDER) adequately assessed safety. The creation
of a new center will raise the profile of drug safety within the
agency.
Second, our bill will provide the Director of CPDER with significant
new authorities, including: the authority to require drug companies to
conduct postmarket studies of their products if there are questions
about safety or effectiveness; the authority to take corrective
actions, such as labeling changes, restricted distribution, and other
risk management tools, if an unreasonable risk exists; the authority to
review drug advertisements before they are disseminated, and to require
certain disclosures about increased risk; and in extreme cases, the
authority to pull the product off the market.
These new authorities will allow the FDA to act quickly to get
answers when there are questions about the safety of a drug, and to act
decisively to mitigate the risks when the evidence shows that a drug
presents a safety issue. With these authorities, we will never again
have a situation where a critical labeling change takes two years to
complete, as was the case with Vioxx. When we are talking about drugs
that are already on the market and in widespread use, any delay can put
millions of patients in harm's way.
Third and lastly, this legislation will authorize the appropriation
of $500 million over the next 5 years to provide the new center with
the resources to carry out the provisions of this legislation.
I would like to thank several groups that have endorsed this bill,
and that were instrumental in its drafting, including Consumer's Union,
the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation, the National
Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD), the National Women's Health
Network (NWHN), the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG), the
Consumer Federation of America, and the Center for Medical Consumers.
I look forward to working with all of my colleagues, including
Senator Enzi and Senator Kennedy on the HELP Committee, to see this
legislation enacted as soon as possible. By strengthening the ability
of the FDA to ensure the safety of prescription drugs once they are on
the market, this legislation will allow physicians to prescribe, and
patients to use, prescription drugs without wondering if the medicines
intended to help them will hurt them instead. It will help ensure that
the term ``FDA-Approved'' will remain the gold standard for safety and
quality.
______
By Mr. BURNS:
S. 931. A bill to reduce temporarily the duty on certain articles of
natural cork; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to
address the difference between the import tariff placed on unfinished
cork and refined cork. Unfinished cork has a higher import tariff than
already-refined cork--this problem is in need of a resolution.
Unfinished cork is the principal element of a fishing pole's grip and
must be imported as it is not available domestically. Many fishing rod
companies reside in Montana, such as the R.L. Winston Rod Company of
Twin Bridges. I am aware that fishing rod manufacturers, particularly
fly-fishing rod manufacturers, are under pressure to increase the price
of their equipment because of prohibitively high tariff on the import
of unfinished cork.
[[Page S4428]]
While the tariff on already-finished cork is 6 percent, unfinished cork
is subject to a 14 percent tariff. It just does not make good sense to
charge a significantly higher levy on an unfinished product that is
imported and then handcrafted by American workers.
This inconsistency must end by leveling the difference between the
two tariffs. The reduction will enable American workers to continue
manufacturing custom-made fishing rod grips, keep the price of all
fishing poles down, and bring a measure of common sense to this portion
of our tariff law. Once resolved, domestic businesses will be able to
finish fly rods here, leading to an increasingly competitive place in
the market for American goods. With this change Montana's small
businesses will benefit as will our overall economy in the state.
I am pleased that some of my colleagues in the House have decided to
assist in this effort. I truly appreciate the work of Representative
Simmons of Connecticut, who is leading this legislation in the House.
He has already signed on 17 co-sponsors to this legislation at last
count. His assistance has been invaluable, and I look forward to
working with him as this legislation moves forward.
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. 931
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CERTAIN ARTICLES OF NATURAL CORK.
(a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by
inserting in numerical sequence the following new heading:
`` 9902.45.03 Articles of 6% No change No change On or before 12/
natural cork 31/2008 ''
(provided for .
in subheading
4503.90.60)....
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
applies with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from
warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Ms. Mikulski, Mrs.
Murray, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Corzine, Mr.
Akaka, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Schumer, and Mr. Dayton):
S. 932. A bill to provide for paid sick leave to ensure that
Americans can address their own health needs and the health needs of
their families; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, the ability of American families to live
the American dream is becoming harder and harder. With each passing
month, it's more difficult for families to earn a living--to pay the
mortgage and the doctor bills, and send their sons and daughters to
college.
In the Bush economy, families are worried about their job security,
their income, and the cost of living. They're working longer and harder
and finding it more and more difficult to balance their work and their
family responsibilities.
Most Americans assume that paid sick days are a right. They're not.
Half of all American workers are not guaranteed the right to time off
when they're ill, without losing their pay, or even their job.
In 1993, Congress and the administration guaranteed unpaid leave for
millions of working men and women to deal with serious medical
problems.
It's time to build on this success, and ensure that millions of
workers can also take time off when they need an annual check-up, when
their children are sick with a cold, and when their ailing elderly
parents need to be taken to the doctor.
Hard-working men and women deserve better. That's why Congresswoman
DeLauro and I are introducing legislation to guarantee workers 7 days
of paid sick leave a year to care for their own medical needs and those
of their family members. This proposal covers workers at all
businesses, except small businesses with fewer than 15 employees.
This is a family issue. When my son was diagnosed with cancer in his
leg as a child, and had to undergo surgery, I was able to take the time
I needed to be there for him. But year after year, countless employees
have to choose between the job they need and the family they love.
Families deserve the flexibility to care for each other when they get
sick.
It's an economic issue. Paid sick days actually save businesses money
through reduced turnover and increased productivity. A recent study by
Cornell University examined the problem of employees coming to work
despite medical problems. They found it costs business $180 billion
annually in lost productivity.
It's also a public health issue. Too often, employees come to work
sick and co-workers and many others can easily be infected. Recently, a
court ruled that because of the lack of paid sick leave, a stomach
virus in one worker infected 600 guests and 300 employees at the Reno
Hilton Hotel in Nevada.
Paid sick days will help prevent the spread of illnesses like that.
Taking time off to treat illnesses and injuries will save health costs
in the long run. It will make an important difference for insurers, for
hospitals, and for the health of millions of Americans.
It's long past time to provide paid sick days for workers. This bill
is a first step to guarantee that every worker who needs sick leave has
it and can afford to take it.
____________________