Congressional Record, Volume 151 Issue 76 (Thursday, June 9, 2005)

[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 76 (Thursday, June 9, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6301-S6339]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. ALEXANDER (for himself and Mr. Warner):
S. 1208. A bill to provide for local control for the siting of
windmills; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, in order to protect our Nation's most
scenic areas, Senator Warner, the senior Senator from Virginia, and I
are today introducing a revised version of the Environmentally
Responsible Windpower Act of 2005. It will be introduced in the House
of Representatives by Congressman John Duncan, a Republican, who is
chairman of the Water Resources Subcommittee, and by Representative
Bart Gordon, a Democrat, who is the ranking Democrat on the Science and
Technology Committee.
Senator Warner and I have listened to our colleagues, and we have
made several changes in our initial bill to simplify it and to make it
the kind of bill we hope all Senators will think makes good sense. What
we have done is to simplify the local notification procedures and to
more precisely protect scenic areas of the country without impacting
the entire coastline. We have also removed a provision regarding
military bases that was in our bill since that can be addressed in
other legislation.
Our revised bill would do three things:
No. 1, to protect America's most scenic treasures, such as the Grand
Canyon, the Statue of Liberty, and the Great Smoky Mountains National
Park, and deny Federal subsidies for giant wind turbines within 20
miles of any national park, national military park, national seashore,
national lakeshore, or 20 World Heritage sites in the United States.
No. 2, to protect our most pristine coastlines, it would deny Federal
subsidies for wind turbines less than 20 miles offshore, which is the
horizon of a national seashore, a national lakeshore, or a National
Wildlife Refuge.
No. 3, to enhance local control, which most of us believe in, it
would give communities a 180-day timeout period from when a wind
project is filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in which
to review local zoning laws related to the placement of these giant
wind turbines.
This legislation is necessary because my research suggests that if
the present policies are continued we will spend over the next 5 years
nearly $4.5 billion to subsidize windmills. Because of those large
subsidies, the number of the giant wind turbines in the United States
is expected to grow from 6,700 today to 40,000, or even double that
number in 20 years according to estimates by the Department of Energy
and the Union of Concerned Scientists.
These wind turbines are not your grandmother's windmills, gently
pumping water from the farm well. Here is just one example, which my
colleagues from Alabama and South Carolina will especially appreciate.
The University of Tennessee has the second largest football stadium in
America, seating 107,000 people. The Senator from Alabama and I sat
there while Auburn University beat the tar out of the University of
Tennessee last year. I ask him to imagine that just one of these giant
wind turbines would fit into that stadium. It would rise to more than
twice the height of the highest skybox.
Its rotor blades would stretch almost from 10-yard line to 10-yard
line. And on a clear night, its flashing red lights could be seen for
20 miles. Usually, these wind turbines are located in wind farms
containing 20 or more, but the number can be more than 100. They work
best, of course, where the wind blows best which, in our part of the
country, is along scenic coastlines or scenic ridgetops.
Now, reasonable Members of this body may disagree about the cost,
effectiveness, and appropriateness of such wind turbines. We can have
that debate at another time. But at least we ought to be able to agree
not to subsidize building them in places that damage our most scenic
areas and coastlines.
Since wind turbines of this giant size are such a relatively new
phenomenon, it fits our American traditions to give local communities
time to stop and think about their most appropriate location.
In conclusion, Mr. President, let me emphasize that our legislation
does not prohibit the building of a single wind turbine. It only denies
a Federal taxpayer subsidy in highly scenic areas. And it ensures local
governments have the time to review wind turbine proposals.
This revised version does not give local authorities any power they
do not already have. It simply gives them a little time to act.
We intend to offer our legislation as an amendment when the full
Senate debates the Energy bill next week, and we hope our colleagues
will join us in this effort to ensure the Federal Government does not
provide tax incentives that ruin the beauty of our most pristine and
scenic areas around our country.
Egypt has its pyramids, Italy has its art, England has its history,
and the United States has the great American outdoors. We should prize
that and protect it where we can. One way to do that is to make sure
when we look at the Statue of Liberty, when we look at the Great Smoky
Mountains, when we look at the Grand Canyon, we do not have giant
windmills, twice as tall as Neyland Stadium, with flashing red lights,
in between us and that landscape.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record
the text of the legislation which Senator Warner and I are introducing,
a copy of the attachment which includes the approximately 200 highly
scenic sites that could be protected by the Environmentally Responsible
Windpower Act of 2005, and two editorials from Tennessee newspapers--
one from the Chattanooga Times Free Press and one from the Knoxville
News Sentinel--which comment on the previous legislation we introduced.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

S. 1208

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 ``Environmentally Responsible
Windpower Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. LOCAL CONTROL FOR SITING OF WINDMILLS.

(a) Local Notification.--Prior to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission issuing to any wind turbine project its
Exempt-Wholesale Generator Status, Market-Based Rate
Authority, or Qualified Facility rate schedule, the wind
project shall complete its Local Notification Process.
(b) Local Notification Process.--
(1) In this section, the term ``Local Authorities'' means
the governing body, and the senior executive of the body, at
the lowest level of government that possesses authority under
State law to carry out this Act.
(2) Applicant shall notify in writing the Local Authorities
on the day of the filing of such Market-Based Rate
application or Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Form
number 556 (or a successor form) at the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. Evidence of such notification shall be
submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
(3) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission shall notify
in writing the Local Authorities within 10 days of the filing
of such Market-Based Rate application or Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Form number 556 (or a successor form)
at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
(4) The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission shall not
issue to the project Market-Based Rate Authority, Exempt
Wholesaler Generator Status, or Qualified Facility rate
schedule, until 180 days after the date on which the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission notifies the Local Authorities
under paragraph (3).
(c) Highly Scenic Area and Federal Land.--
(1) A Highly Scenic Area is--
(A) any area listed as an official United Nations
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization World
Heritage Site, as

[[Page S6302]]

supported by the Department of the Interior, the National
Park Service, and the International Council on Monuments and
Sites;
(B) land designated as a National Park;
(C) a National Lakeshore;
(D) a National Seashore;
(E) a National Wildlife Refuge that is adjacent to an
ocean; or
(F) a National Military Park.
(2) A Qualified Wind Project is any wind-turbine project
located--
(A)(i) in a Highly Scenic Area; or
(ii) within 20 miles of the boundaries of an area described
in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), (D), or (F) of paragraph (1);
or
(B) within 20 miles off the coast of a National Wildlife
Refuge that is adjacent to an ocean.
(3) Prior to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
issuing to a Qualified Wind Project its Exempt-Wholesale
Generator Status, Market-Based Rate Authority, or Qualified
Facility rate schedule, an environmental impact statement
shall be conducted and completed by the lead agency in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). If no lead agency is designated,
the lead agency shall be the Department of the Interior.
(4) The environmental impact statement determination shall
be issued within 12 months of the date of application.
(5) Such environmental impact statement review shall
include a cumulative impacts analysis addressing visual
impacts and avian mortality analysis of a Qualified Wind
Project.
(6) A Qualified Wind Project shall not be eligible for any
Federal tax subsidy.
(d) Effective Date.--
(1) This section shall expire 10 years after the date of
enactment of this Act.
(2) Nothing in this section shall prevent or discourage
environmental review of any wind projects or any Qualified
Wind Project on a State or local level.

Scenic Sites Protected by the Environmentally Responsible Windpower Act
of 2005

ALABAMA

National Parks: Little River Canyon National Preserve.
National Military Parks: Horseshoe Bend.

ALASKA

National Parks: Denali National Park & Preserve, Gates of
the Arctic National Park & Preserve, Glacier Bay National
Park & Preserve, Katmai National Park & Preserve, Kenai
Fjords National Park, Kobuk Valley National Park, Lake Clark
National Park & Preserve, Wrangell-St, Elias National Park &
Preserve.
World Heritage Sites: Glacier Bay National Park & Preserve,
Wrangell-St. Elias National Park & Preserve.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Izembek National
Wildlife Refuge, Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuge,
Becharof National Wildlife Refuge, Kodiak National Wildlife
Refuge, Selawik National Wildlife Refuge.

ARIZONA

National Parks: Grand Canyon National Park, Petrified
Forest National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Grand Canyon National Park.

ARKANSAS

National Parks: Hot Springs National Park.
National Military Parks: Pea Ridge.

CALIFORNIA

National Parks: Channel Islands National Park, Death Valley
National Park, Joshua Tree National Park, Lassen Volcanic
National Park, Redwood National and State Parks, Sequoia &
Kings Canyon National Parks, Yosemite National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Redwood National Park, Yosemite
National Park.
National Seashores: Point Reyes National Seashore.
National Wildlife Refuqes: Castle Rock National Wildlife
Refuge, Ellicott Slough National Wildlife Refuge, Farallon
National Wildlife Refuge, Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes National
Wildlife Refuge, Humboldt Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Marin
Islands National Wildlife Refuge, Salinas River National
Wildlife Refuge, San Diego Bay National Wildlife Refuge, San
Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Seal Beach National
Wildlife Refuge, Tijuana Slough National Wildlife Refuge.

COLORADO

National Parks: Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park,
Great Sand Dunes National Park & Preserve, Mesa Verde
National Park, Rocky Mountain National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Mesa Verde.

CONNECTICUT

Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Stewart B. McKinney
National Wildlife Refuge.

DELAWARE

Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Bombay Hook National
Wildlife Refuge, Prime Hook National Wildlife Refuge.

FLORIDA

National Parks: Biscayne National Park, Dry Tortugas
National Park, Everglades National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Everglades National Park.
National Seashores: Canaveral National Seashore, Gulf
Islands National Seashore.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuge Sites: Archie Carr
National Wildlife Refuge, Arthur R. Marshall Loxahatchee
National Wildlife Refuge, Cedar Keys National Wildlife
Refuge, Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge, Crocodile
Lake National Wildlife Refuge, Crystal River National
Wildlife Refuge, Egmont Key National Wildlife Refuge, Great
White Heron National Wildlife Refuge, Hobe Sound National
Wildlife Refuge, Island Bay National Wildlife Refuge, J. N.
Ding Darling National Wildlife Refuge, Key West National
Wildlife Refuge, Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge,
Matlacha Pass National Wildlife Refuge, Merritt Island
National Wildlife Refuge, National Key Deer Refuge National
Wildlife Refuge, Passage Key National Wildlife Refuge,
Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge, Pine Island National
Wildlife Refuge, Pinellas National Wildlife Refuge, St. Johns
National Wildlife Refuge, St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge,
St. Vincent National Wildlife Refuge, Ten Thousand Islands
National Wildlife Refuge.

GEORGIA

National Seashores: Cumberland Island National Seashore.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Blackbeard Island
National Wildlife Refuge, Harris Neck National Wildlife
Refuge, Wassaw National Wildlife Refuge, Wolf Island National
Wildlife Refuge.

HAWAII

National Parks: Haleakala National Park, Hawaii Volcanoes
National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Hawaii Volcanoes National Park.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Oahu Forest National
Wildlife Refuge, Hanalei National Wildlife Refuge, Kilauea
National Wildlife Refuge, Hakalau National Wildlife Refuge,
Kealia Pond National Wildlife Refuge, Pearl Harbor National
Wildlife Refuge, Kakahaia National Wildlife Refuge.

IDAHO

National Parks: Yellowstone National Park.

ILLINOIS

World Heritage Sites: Cahokia Mounds State Historic Site.

INDIANA

National Seashores: Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore.

KENTUCKY

National Parks: Mammoth Cave National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Mammoth Cave National Park.

LOUISIANA

Coastal National Heritage Sites: Bayou Teche National
Wildlife Refuge, Big Branch National Wildlife Refuge, Breton
National Wildlife Refuge, Delta National Wildlife Refuge,
Sabine National Wildlife Refuge, Shell Keys National Wildlife
Refuge.

MAINE

National Parks: Acadia National Park.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Aroostook National
Wildlife Refuge, Cross Island National Wildlife Refuge,
Franklin Island National Wildlife Refuge, Moosehorn National
Wildlife Refuge, Petit Manan National Wildlife Refuge, Pond
Island National Wildlife Refuge, Rachel Carson National
Wildlife Refuge, Seal Island National Wildlife Refuge.

MARYLAND

National Seashores: Assateague Island National Seashore.

MASSACHUSETTS

National Seashores: Cape Cod National Seashore.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Mashpee National
Wildlife Refuge, Massaspit National Wildlife Refuge, Monormoy
National Wildlife Refuge, Nantucket National Wildlife Refuge,
Normans Land Island National Wildlife Refuge, Parker River
National Wildlife Refuge, Thacher Island National Wildlife
Refuge.

MICHIGAN

National Parks: Isle Royale National Park.
National Lakeshores: Pictured Rocks National Lakeshore,
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.

MINNESOTA

National Parks: Voyageurs National Park.

MISSISSIPPI

National Seashores: Gulf Islands National Seashore.
National Military Parks: Vicksburg.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Grand Bay National
Wildlife Refuge, Mississippi Sandhill Crane National Wildlife
Refuge

MONTANA

National Parks: Yellowstone National Park, Glacier National
Park.
World Heritage Sites: Yellowstone National Park.

NEVADA

National Parks: Death Valley National Park, Great Basin
National Park.

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Great Bay National
Wildlife Refuge.

NEW JERSEY

Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Cape May National
Wildlife Refuge, Edwin B. Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge.

NEW MEXICO

National Parks: Carlsbad Caverns National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Chaco Culture National Historical
Park, Pueblo de Taos, Carlsbad Caverns National Park.

NEW YORK

World Heritage Sites: Statue of Liberty.
National Seashores: Fire Island National Seashore.

[[Page S6303]]

NORTH CAROLINA

National Parks: Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
National Seashores: Cape Hatteras National Seashore, Cape
Lookout National Seashore.
National Military Parks: Guilford Courthouse
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Alligator River National
Wildlife Refuge, Cedar Island National Wildlife Refuge,
Currituck National Wildlife Refuge, Mackay Island National
Wildlife Refuge, Mattamuskeet National Wildlife Refuge, Pea
Island National Wildlife Refuge, Pocosin Lakes National
Wildlife Refuge, Swanquarter National Wildlife Refuge.

NORTH DAKOTA

National Parks: Theodore Roosevelt National Park.

OHIO

National Parks: Cuyahoga Valley National Parks.

OREGON

National Parks: Crater Lake National Park.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Bandon Marsh National
Wildlife Refuge, Cape Meares National Wildlife Refuge,
Nestucca Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Oregon Islands
National Wildlife Refuge, Siletz Bay National Wildlife
Refuge, Three Arch Rocks National Wildlife Refuge.

PENNSYLVANIA

World Heritage Sites: Independence Hall.
National Military Parks: Gettysburg.

RHODE ISLAND

Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Block Island National
Wildlife Refuge, John H. Chafee National Wildlife Refuge,
Ninigret National Wildlife Refuge, Sachuest Point National
Wildlife Refuge, Trustom Pond National Wildlife Refuge.

SOUTH CAROLINA

National Parks: Congaree National Park.
National Military Parks: Kings Mountain.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: ACE Basin National
Wildlife Refuge, Cape Romain National Wildlife Refuge,
Pickney Island National Wildlife Refuge, Savannah National
Wildlife Refuge, Tybee National Wildlife Refuge, Waccamaw
National Wildlife Refuge.

SOUTH DAKOTA

National Parks: Badlands National Park, Wind Cave National
Park.

TENNESSEE

National Parks: Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Great Smoky Mountains National Park.
National Military Parks: Chickamauga and Chattanooga,
Shiloh.

TEXAS

National Parks: Big Bend National Park, Guadalupe Mountains
National Park.
National Seashores: Padre Island National Seashore.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Anahuac National
Wildlife Refuge, Aransas National Wildlife Refuge, Big Boggy
National Wildlife Refuge, Brazoria National Wildlife Refuge,
Laguna Atascossa National Wildlife Refuge, McFaddin National
Wildlife Refuge, San Bernard National Wildlife Refuge, Texas
Point National Wildlife Refuge, Trinity River National
Wildlife Refuge

UTAH

National Parks: Arches National Park, Bryce Canyon National
Park, Canyonlands National Park, Capitol Reef National Park,
Zion National Park.

VIRGINIA

National Parks: Shenandoah National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Monticello, University of Virginia
Historic District
National Seashores: Assateague Island National Seashore.
National Military Parks: Fredericksburg and Spotsylvania
Courthouse Battlefields.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Back Bay National
Wildlife Refuge, Chincoteague National Wildlife Refuge,
Eastern Shore of Virginia National Wildlife Refuge,
Featherstone National Wildlife Refuge, Fisherman Island
National Wildlife Refuge, James River National Wildlife
Refuge, Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge, Nansemond
National Wildlife Refuge, Occoquah Bay National Wildlife
Refuge, Plum Tree Island National Wildlife Refuge, Wallops
Island National Wildlife Refuge

WASHINGTON

National Parks: Mount Rainier National Park, North Cascades
National Park, Olympic National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Olympic National Park.
Coastal National Wildlife Refuges: Copalis National
Wildlife Refuge, Flattery National Wildlife Refuge, Grays
Harbor National Wildlife Refuge, Quillayute Needles National
Wildlife Refuge, Willapa National Wildlife Refuge.

WISCONSIN

National Lakeshores: Apostle Islands National Lakeshore.

WYOMING

National Parks: Grand Teton National Park, Yellowstone
National Park.
World Heritage Sites: Yellowstone National Park.
____

[From the Chattanooga Times Free Press, May 22, 2005]

Beware of Windmills

It was reported in the classical fictional literature of
Miguel de Cervantes, and in the delightful derivative musical
play ``Man of La Mancha,'' that Don Quixote tilted at
windmills, thinking them to be adversaries.
But in the real-life United States today, some people are
promoting the erection of many thousands of windmills as a
means of generating electric power, with too few people being
aware that these modern windmills would be very real, not
imaginary, adversaries.
Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., has introduced a bill in
Congress designed to avoid having an army of huge windmills
slip up on us without sufficient warning.
The senator says an effort is being made to require
electric companies to produce 10 percent of their power from
``renewable'' sources. That means wind, hydro, solar,
geothermal and biomass power. Sounds good on the surface,
doesn't it? The trouble is that there are few opportunities
for substantial power generation by these means except by
wind. What would that mean?
``The idea of windmills,'' said Sen. Alexander, conjures up
pleasant images--of Holland and tulips, of rural America . .
. My grandparents had such a windmill at their well pump . .
. But the windmills we are talking about today are not your
grandmother's windmills.
``Each one is typically 100 yards tall, two stories taller
than the Statue of Liberty, taller than a football field is
long.
``These windmills are wider than a 747 jumbo jet.
``Their rotor blades turn at 100 miles per hour.
``These towers and their flashing red lights can be seen
from more than 25 miles away.
``Their noise can be heard from up to a half-mile away. It
is a thumping and swishing sound. It has been described by
residents that are unhappy with the noise as sounding like a
brick wrapped in a towel tumbling in a clothes drier on a
perpetual basis.
``These windmills produce very little power since they only
operate when the wind blows enough or doesn't blow too much,
so they are usually placed in large wind farms covering huge
amounts of land.
``As an example, if the Congress ordered electric companies
to build 10 percent of their power from renewable energy--
which as we have said, has to be mostly wind--and if we renew
the current subsidy each year, by the year 2025, my state of
Tennessee would have at least 1,700 windmills, which would
cover land almost equal to two times the size of the city of
Knoxville.''
Do these revelations by Sen. Alexander, accompanied by the
prospect that $3.7 billion of your taxes might be required
for subsidies over five years, cause you to want to have
100,000 of these huge, red lighted, noisy, thumping windmills
erected throughout the United States, with 1,700 of them in
Tennessee--perhaps in your neighborhood?
Talk about ``pollution'' of area, sound and sight!
Surely, non-polluting nuclear power and other energy
sources would be better. The windmill subsidies could be used
better to promote cleaner, more efficient and cheaper coal,
gas and oil technology.
Sen. Alexander said the purpose of his legislation, in
which Sen. John Warner, R-Va., has joined, is to be sure that
``local authorities have a chance to consider the impact of
such massive new structures before dozens or hundreds of them
begin to be built in their communities.''
For that fair warning, we should give thanks. If you have
seen windmill farms in California, Texas or Hawaii, you will
surely understand why the warning is appropriate.
Don Quixote thought he had problems with windmills, He
hadn't seen the kind Sen. Alexander is talking about.
____

[KnoxNews, June 9, 2005]

Windmills Need Commonsense Approach

U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander has unleashed a storm of
controversy among environmentalists over windmills, but we
think he is using a commonsense approach.
Alexander has introduced legislation that would restrict
tax credits for new windmills, and he has asked TVA to place
a moratorium on new windmills.
Alexander's bill would give local governments veto power
over wind farm projects and require environmental impact
statements for windmill construction in offshore areas and
within 20 miles of certain scenic areas, such as the Great
Smoky Mountains National Park, and military bases.
The provision on eliminating tax credits for projects in
those restricted areas, however, is what has drawn criticism
from environmentalists and windmill manufacturers.
Stephen Smith of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy
said the legislation is ``the most direct assault on wind
power we've ever seen by a United States senator.''
Jaime Steve, a lobbyist for the American Wind Energy
Association, said wind energy could bring up to 4,500 new
jobs and $4.2 billion in investment to the state in the next
five or six years.
Alexander released a statement that said his bill would
protect scenic areas and give local citizens more control.
``It keeps those 100-yard-tall, monstrous structures away
from Signal Mountain, Lookout Mountain,

[[Page S6304]]

Roan Mountain, the Tennessee River Gorge, the foothills of
the Smokies and other highly scenic areas,'' Alexander said.
``As for jobs,'' he continued, ``every Tennessee job is
important, but I fear that hundreds of these giant windmills
across Tennessee's ridges could destroy our tourism industry,
which could cost us tens of thousands of jobs.''
In remarks on the Senate floor, Alexander said serious
questions have been raised about how much relying on wind
power will raise the cost of electricity. ``My studies
suggest that, at a time when America needs large amounts of
low-cost, reliable power, wind produces puny amounts of high-
cost unreliable power,'' he said. ``We need lower prices;
wind power raises prices.''
About his request to TVA, Alexander said the moratorium
should be in effect ``until the new TVA board, Congress and
local officials can evaluate the impact on these massive
structures on our electric rates, our view of the mountains
and our tourism industry.''
TVA Directors Bill Baxter and Skila Harris responded that
TVA has no plans to build more wind turbines in the next two
years and beyond.
We believe Alexander has raised some serious questions
about the effectiveness and efficiency of wind power. While
we understand the importance of focusing on new forms of
energy to reduce reliance on oil, we agree with Alexander's
premise that we must go about it wisely.
``I hope we decide that we need a real national energy
policy instead of a national windmill policy,'' Alexander
said.
We think that's well said.
______

By Mr. GREGG:
S. 1209. A bill to establish and strengthen postsecondary programs
and courses in the subjects of traditional American history, free
institutions, and Western civilization, available to students preparing
to teach these subjects, and to other students; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Higher
Education for Freedom Act. This bill will establish a competitive grant
program making funds available to institutions of higher education,
centers within such institutions, and associated nonprofit foundations
to promote both graduate and undergraduate programs focused on the
teaching and study of traditional American history and government, and
the history and achievements of Western Civilization. The program will
help ensure that more postsecondary students have the opportunity to
participate in programs focused on these critical subjects and that
prospective teachers of history and government have access to a solid
foundation of content knowledge.
Today, more than ever, it is important to preserve and defend our
common heritage of freedom and civilization, and to ensure that future
generations of Americans understand the importance of traditional
American history and the principles of free government upon which this
Nation was founded. This knowledge is not only essential to the full
participation of our citizenry in America's civic life, but also to the
continued success of the American experiment in self-government, which
binds together a diverse people into a single Nation with common
purposes.
However, college students' lack of historical literacy is quite
startling, and too few of our colleges and universities are focused on
the task of imparting this fundamental knowledge to the next
generation. A survey of students at America's top colleges found that
seniors could not identify Valley Forge, words from the Gettysburg
Address, or even the basic tenets of the U.S. Constitution. Given high
school-level American history questions, 81 percent of the college
seniors would have received a D or F, the report found. One college
professor informed me that her students did not know which side Lee was
on during the Civil War, or whether the Russians were allies or enemies
in World War II. A student of hers asked why anyone should care what
the Founding Fathers wrote.
As unfortunate as these findings are, they are perhaps not
surprising. A survey conducted several years ago found that not one of
America's top fifty colleges and universities required its students to
take a course in American history. More recently, another report
documented the extent to which our top postsecondary institutions have
abandoned the traditional core requirements that once gave students a
systemic grasp of our nation's ideals, institutions, and origins.
Indeed, only about a dozen undergraduate programs at major American
colleges and universities have a central focus on American
constitutional history and principles.
We are doing our students a disservice if we allow them to graduate
from an institution of higher education without a solid understanding
of and appreciation for our democratic heritage. We cannot hope to
preserve our democracy without taking action to remedy our students'
historical illiteracy. As Thomas Jefferson once wrote, ``If a nation
expects to be ignorant--and free--in a state of civilization, it
expects what never was and never will be.'' I believe the time has come
for Congress to do something to promote the teaching and study of
traditional American history at the postsecondary level, and I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1209

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Higher Education for Freedom
Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) Given the increased threat to American ideals in the
trying times in which we live, it is important to preserve
and defend our common heritage of freedom and civilization
and to ensure that future generations of Americans understand
the importance of traditional American history and the
principles of free government on which this Nation was
founded in order to provide the basic knowledge that is
essential to full and informed participation in civic life
and to the larger vibrancy of the American experiment in
self-government, binding together a diverse people into a
single Nation with a common purpose.
(2) However, despite its importance, most of the Nation's
colleges and universities no longer require United States
history or systematic study of Western civilization and free
institutions as a prerequisite to graduation.
(3) In addition, too many of our Nation's elementary school
and secondary school history teachers lack the training
necessary to effectively teach these subjects, due largely to
the inadequacy of their teacher preparation.
(4) Distinguished historians and intellectuals fear that
without a common civic memory and a common understanding of
the remarkable individuals, events, and ideals that have
shaped our Nation and its free institutions, the people in
the United States risk losing much of what it means to be an
American, as well as the ability to fulfill the fundamental
responsibilities of citizens in a democracy.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of this Act are to promote and
sustain postsecondary academic centers, institutes, and
programs that offer undergraduate and graduate courses,
support research, sponsor lectures, seminars, and
conferences, and develop teaching materials, for the purpose
of developing and imparting a knowledge of traditional
American history, the American Founding, and the history and
nature of, and threats to, free institutions, or of the
nature, history, and achievements of Western civilization,
particularly for--
(1) undergraduate students who are enrolled in teacher
education programs, who may consider becoming school
teachers, or who wish to enhance their civic competence;
(2) elementary school, middle school, and secondary school
teachers in need of additional training in order to
effectively teach in these subject areas; and
(3) graduate students and postsecondary faculty who wish to
teach about these subject areas with greater knowledge and
effectiveness.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:
(1) Eligible institution.--The term ``eligible
institution'' means--
(A) an institution of higher education;
(B) a specific program within an institution of higher
education; and
(C) a non-profit history or academic organization
associated with higher education whose mission is consistent
with the purposes of this Act.
(2) Free institution.--The term ``free institution'' means
an institution that emerged out of Western civilization, such
as democracy, constitutional government, individual rights,
market economics, religious freedom and tolerance, and
freedom of thought and inquiry.
(3) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the
term under section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1001).
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Education.
(5) Traditional american history.--The term ``traditional
American history'' means--

[[Page S6305]]

(A) the significant constitutional, political,
intellectual, economic, and foreign policy trends and issues
that have shaped the course of American history; and
(B) the key episodes, turning points, and leading figures
involved in the constitutional, political, intellectual,
diplomatic, and economic history of the United States.

SEC. 4. GRANTS TO ELIGIBLE INSTITUTIONS.

(a) In General.--From amounts appropriated to carry out
this Act, the Secretary shall award grants, on a competitive
basis, to eligible institutions, which grants shall be used
for--
(1) history teacher preparation initiatives, that--
(A) stress content mastery in traditional American history
and the principles on which the American political system is
based, including the history and philosophy of free
institutions, and the study of Western civilization; and
(B) provide for grantees to carry out research, planning,
and coordination activities devoted to the purposes of this
Act; and
(2) strengthening postsecondary programs in fields related
to the American founding, free institutions, and Western
civilization, particularly through--
(A) the design and implementation of courses, lecture
series, and symposia, the development and publication of
instructional materials, and the development of new, and
supporting of existing, academic centers;
(B) research supporting the development of relevant course
materials;
(C) the support of faculty teaching in undergraduate and
graduate programs; and
(D) the support of graduate and postgraduate fellowships
and courses for scholars related to such fields.
(b) Selection Criteria.--In selecting eligible institutions
for grants under this section for any fiscal year, the
Secretary shall establish criteria by regulation, which
shall, at a minimum, consider the education value and
relevance of the institution's programming to carrying out
the purposes of this Act and the expertise of key personnel
in the area of traditional American history and the
principles on which the American political system is based,
including the political and intellectual history and
philosophy of free institutions, the American Founding, and
other key events that have contributed to American freedom,
and the study of Western civilization.
(c) Grant Application.--An eligible institution that
desires to receive a grant under this Act shall submit to the
Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and
containing such information as the Secretary may prescribe by
regulation.
(d) Grant Review.--The Secretary shall establish procedures
for reviewing and evaluating grants made under this Act.
(e) Grant Awards.--
(1) Maximum and minimum grants.--The Secretary shall award
each grant under this Act in an amount that is not less than
$400,000 and not more than $6,000,000.
(2) Exception.--A subgrant made by an eligible institution
under this Act to another eligible institution shall not be
subject to the minimum amount specified in paragraph (1).
(f) Multiple Awards.--For the purposes of this Act, the
Secretary may award more than 1 grant to an eligible
institution.
(g) Subgrants.--An eligible institution may use grant funds
provided under this Act to award subgrants to other eligible
institutions at the discretion of, and subject to the
oversight of, the Secretary.

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

For the purpose of carrying out this Act, there are
authorized to be appropriated--
(1) $140,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
(2) such sums as may be necessary for each of the
succeeding 5 fiscal years.
______

By Mr. HARKIN (for himself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Obama, and Mr.
Coleman):
S. 1210. A bill to enhance the national security of the United States
by providing for the research, development, demonstration,
administrative support, and market mechanisms for widespread deployment
and commercialization of biobased fuels and biobased products, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, over the past 100 years, the economy of
the United States has become inextricably tied to the supply of
petroleum. In the early part of the 20th century, America's abundant
sources of petroleum helped drive tremendous improvements in quality of
life, offering greater mobility through gasoline-powered
transportation, and a whole host of new and innovative products made
from plastics and other petroleum-based chemicals.
But as the 20th century wore on, the costs of a petroleum-based
economy grew increasingly apparent: pollution of air and water became a
growing risk to our health and environment, and a growing dependence on
foreign imports became an increasing risk to our economic and national
security. Today, nearly two-thirds of the oil we use comes from
overseas, much of it from hostile and unstable regimes.
Instability in the oil-producing regions of the world, the growing
threat of global warming, and record-high prices for gasoline at the
pump all call for a new kind of economy for the 21st century: one based
on a resource that is not only abundant, but clean, renewable and home-
grown.
Today, biofuels like ethanol and biodiesel are making great inroads
in reducing our foreign oil dependence. The biofuels industry will
provide nearly 4 billion gallons of clean, domestically-produced fuel
alternatives to gasoline and diesel this year. We need to ensure
continued growth of renewable fuels, first by supporting a robust
Renewable Fuels Standard of at least 8 billion gallons a year by 2012,
and then by supporting additional measures to grow the ``bioeconomy.''
That is why I am very proud today to be joined by my colleagues,
Senator Lugar, Senator Obama, and Senator Coleman, in introducing the
National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005. This important
bipartisan legislation provides the research, development,
demonstration, and market mechanisms necessary to move this country
from an economy based largely on foreign oil, to one increasingly
fueled with clean, renewable, domestically-grown biomass. It is an
important compliment to a robust RFS, and a vital element of our energy
future.
According to the National Academies of Science, this country
generates nearly 300 million tons of biomass each year--everything from
corn stalks and wheat straw to forest trimmings and even segregated
municipal waste. This biomass is currently sent to landfills or left in
the fields after harvest in quantities greater than that needed to
provide natural cover and nutrient replacement.
The Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that by 2025, an
additional 200 million tons of biomass could be generated each year
from dedicated biomass crops such as native switchgrass, hybrid poplar
and other woody crops, grown throughout the country. These crops
require little or no fertilizer or chemical treatment, while helping to
enhance soil quality and reduce runoff.
Cellulose from biomass can be converted to ethanol, to provide a
clean transportation fuel with potentially near-zero net carbon dioxide
and sulfur emissions, and substantially reduced carbon monoxide,
particulate and toxic emissions compared to petroleum-based fuel. The
Natural Resources Defense Council estimates that by 2050 biomass could
supply 50 percent of the nation's transportation fuel, dramatically
reducing our dependence on foreign oil.
Other products of the biomass refining process, such as biochemicals
and bioplastics, can also complement or replace less environmentally-
friendly petroleum-based equivalents. For example, if all of the
plastic used in the United States were made from biomass instead of
petroleum, the Nation's oil consumption would decrease by 90 to 145
million barrels a year. Biobased plastics can also be composted and
converted back to soil instead of being thrown in a landfill.
Biobased chemicals, lubricants and metal-working fluids are all
available in the marketplace today, and offer safe, non-toxic
alternatives to their petroleum-based counterparts. The National
Academies of Science found that biomass could meet all of the Nation's
needs for organic chemicals, replacing 700 million barrels of petroleum
a year.
But perhaps one of the greatest benefits of biobased fuels and
products is to our rural economy. A mature biomass industry would
create more than 1 million jobs and generate $5 billion annually in
revenue for farmers. This represents a tremendous opportunity to grow
and diversify sources of rural income, while reducing our dependence on
foreign oil, bolstering national security and protecting the
environment.
However, several obstacles still remain. Current Federal programs to
develop biomass crops, establish supply chains, and reduce the cost of
biofuels production are under-funded and lack appropriate targeting.
Potential biomass refinery developers remain reluctant to invest in
construction of ``next generation'' plants due to the high level of
financial risk. And, according to a recent report from the Government
Accountability Office, biobased

[[Page S6306]]

purchase requirements and other bioeconomy measures at the U.S.
Department of Agriculture have not been given the necessary priority
for full implementation.
A wide range of groups, including the Energy Future Coalition, the
National Commission on Energy Policy, the Governors' Ethanol Coalition,
and the Natural Resources Defense Council, is calling on Congress to
invest in the bioeconomy as the best direction for the country's energy
future.
The time to act is now.
This legislation implements several critical measures to help ensure
the widespread deployment and commercialization of biobased fuels and
products over the next 10 years.
The bill substantially updates and improves the Biomass Research and
Development Act by refining its objectives, providing greater focus on
overcoming remaining technical barriers, and increasing funding. It
authorizes $1 billion in research and development over five years to
help today's successful biorefineries become the biorefineries of
tomorrow, while developing advanced biomass crops, crop production
methods, harvesting and transport technology to deliver abundant
biomass to the refinery door.
It creates a reverse auction of production incentives to deliver the
first billion gallons of cellulosic biofuels at the lowest cost to
taxpayers. Each year, cellulosic biofuels refiners will bid for
assistance on a per gallon basis. Refiners who request the lowest level
of assistance will earn production contracts. As the volume of biofuels
production grows, competition will increase, and per gallon incentive
rates will decrease. After the first billion gallons of annual
production, cellulosic ethanol is expected to be competitive with
gasoline without government assistance.
It establishes a new Assistant Secretary position for Energy and
Bioproduct Development at USDA to provide the necessary priority and
resources for bioenergy and bioproduct programs. It expands the Federal
Government biobased product procurement program of the 2002 farm bill
to include government contractors. It also extends the program to the
U.S. Capitol Complex, and establishes the Capitol as a showcase for
biobased products.
It creates grant programs to help small biobased businesses with
marketing and certification of biobased products, and funds bioeconomy
development associations and Land Grant institutions to support the
growth of regional bioeconomies.
The legislation calls on Congress to create tax incentives to
encourage investment in production of biobased fuels and products, and
it provides for education and outreach to promote producer investment
in processing facilities and to heighten consumer awareness of biobased
fuels and products.
Together, these measures will send a strong signal to innovators,
investors and biobased businesses that Congress is committed to
advancing the bioeconomy. With full funding, this bill will deliver the
technological advances needed to help make biobased fuels and products
cost competitive with petroleum-based equivalents, and it will take a
big step toward a future in which our cars run on clean-burning
renewable fuels, our plastics turn to compost, and our Nation's farmers
fortify our energy security.
The bill has strong support from a broad coalition of agricultural
producers, industry, clean energy, environment and national security
groups. I have here several letters of endorsement.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill, and the
accompanying letters of endorsement, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1210

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``National
Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Findings.
Sec. 3. Definitions.

TITLE I--BIOMASS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Sec. 101. Definitions.
Sec. 102. Cooperation and coordination in biomass research and
development.
Sec. 103. Biomass Research and Development Board.
Sec. 104. Biomass Research and Development Technical Advisory
Committee.
Sec. 105. Biomass Research and Development Initiative.
Sec. 106. Reports.
Sec. 107. Funding.
Sec. 108. Termination of authority.
Sec. 109. Biomass-derived hydrogen.

TITLE II--PRODUCTION INCENTIVES

Sec. 201. Production incentives.

TITLE III--ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE FOR ENERGY AND BIOBASED
PRODUCTS

Sec. 301. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture for Energy and Biobased
Products.

TITLE IV--PROCUREMENT OF BIOBASED PRODUCTS

Sec. 401. Federal procurement.
Sec. 402. Capitol Complex procurement.
Sec. 403. Education .
Sec. 404. Regulations.

TITLE V--BIOECONOMY GRANTS AND TAX INCENTIVES

Sec. 501. Small business bioproduct marketing and certification grants.
Sec. 502. Regional bioeconomy development grants.
Sec. 503. Preprocessing and harvesting demonstration grants.
Sec. 504. Sense of the Senate.

TITLE VI--OTHER PROVISIONS

Sec. 601. Education and outreach.
Sec. 602. Reports.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

Congress finds that--
(1) the Governors' Ethanol Coalition, in the report
entitled ``Ethanol From Biomass America's 21st Century
Transportation Fuel'', found that--
(A) the dependence of the United States on oil is a major
risk to national security and economic and environmental
health;
(B) the safest and least costly approach to mitigating
these risks is to set and achieve aggressive biofuels
research, development, production and use goals; and
(C) significant investment in cellulosic biofuels,
including a dramatic expansion of existing research programs,
production and consumer incentives, and commercialization
assistance, is needed;
(2) the National Academy of Sciences has found that there
are abundant sources of waste biomass, and approximately
280,000,000 tons of waste biomass generated, in all regions
of the United States each year;
(3) the Natural Resources Defense Council has estimated
that by 2025, 200,000,000 additional tons of biomass could be
harvested each year from dedicated energy crops grown
throughout the country, yielding $5,000,000,000 annually in
profit for farmers;
(4) the Department of Agriculture has estimated that energy
derived from existing biomass supplies could displace 25
percent of current petroleum imports while still meeting
agricultural demands;
(5) if all diesel fuel in the United States were blended
with a 4-percent blend of biodiesel, crude oil consumption in
the United States would be reduced by 300,000,000 barrels
each year by 2016;
(6) there is sufficient domestic feedstock for the
production of at least 8,000,000,000 annual gallons of
renewable fuels, including ethanol and biodiesel, by 2012;
(7) the Natural Resources Defense Council has estimated
that biomass could supply 50 percent of current
transportation petroleum demand by 2050;
(8) the National Academy of Sciences has estimated that
enough agricultural crop residue is produced each year to
entirely replace the 700,000,000 barrels of petroleum used in
organic chemical production in 2004;
(9) the Biotechnology Industry Organization, in its report
entitled ``New Biotechnology Tools for a Cleaner
Environment'', found that if all plastics in the United
States were made from biomass, oil consumption would decrease
by up to 145,000,000 barrels per year;
(10) the National Academy of Sciences has reported that
biobased products have the potential to improve the
sustainability of natural resources, environmental quality,
and national security while competing economically;
(11) the Department of Agriculture has made significant
advances in the understanding and use by the United States of
biomass as a feedstock for fuels and products;
(12) through participation with the Department of Energy in
the Biomass Research and Development Initiative, the
Department of Agriculture has also made valuable
contributions, through grant-making and other initiatives, to
the support of biomass research and development at
institutions throughout the United States;
(13) the Government Accountability Office has found that--
(A) actions to implement the requirements of the Farm
Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-
171; 116 Stat. 134) for purchasing biobased products have
been limited; and
(B) greater priority by the Department of Agriculture would
promote compliance by other agencies with biobased purchasing
requirements;

[[Page S6307]]

(14) an Assistant Secretary of the Department of
Agriculture for Energy and Biobased Products would provide
the priority, staff, and financial resources to fully
implement biobased purchasing requirements and other
provisions of the energy title of the Farm Security and Rural
Investment Act of 2002;
(15) Federal government contractors and the Architect of
the Capitol are currently exempt from biobased purchasing
requirements of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of
2002;
(16) expansion of those biobased purchasing requirements--
(A) to Federal contractors would significantly expand the
market for, and advance commercialization of, biobased
products; and
(B) to the Architect of the Capitol would, in combination
with a program of public education, allow the Capitol Complex
to serve as a showcase for the existence, use, and benefits
of biobased products;
(17) fuel derived from cellulosic biomass could have near-
zero net carbon dioxide and sulfur emissions, and
substantially reduced carbon monoxide, particulate and toxic
emissions relative to petroleum-based fuels;
(18) the bipartisan National Commission on Energy Policy
has predicted that with a dedicated Federal research,
development, and demonstration effort, cellulosic ethanol
could be less expensive to produce than gasoline by 2015;
(19) the 2004 report of the Rocky Mountain Institute,
entitled ``Winning the Oil Endgame'', estimated that a mature
biomass industry would create up to 1,045,000 jobs;
(20) the National Academy of Sciences has found that there
are significant opportunities to produce biomass ethanol more
efficiently;
(21) the National Commission on Energy Policy has found
that current Federal programs directed toward reducing the
cost of biofuels are under-funded, intermittent, scattered,
and poorly targeted;
(22) a report commissioned by the Department of Defense
urged the United States to invest in a new large-scale
initiative to produce biofuels as an alternative supply
source, and as a feedstock for future fuel vehicles;
(23) the Consumer Federation of America has found that the
blending of ethanol into conventional gasoline can
significantly benefit consumers by lowering prices at the
pump;
(24) 45 leading national security, labor, and energy policy
experts joined the Energy Future Coalition in supporting a
national commitment to cut the oil use of the United States
by 25 percent by 2025 through the rapid development and
deployment of advanced biomass, alcohol, and other available
petroleum fuel alternatives; and
(25) an aggressive effort to advance technology for
conversion of biomass to fuel and products is warranted.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:
(1) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the
Department of Agriculture.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.

TITLE I--BIOMASS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.

Section 303 of the Biomass Research and Development Act of
2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraphs (2), (3), and (9);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), (6), (7), and (8)
as paragraphs (5), (7), (8), (9), and (10) respectively;
(3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) Biobased fuel.--The term `biobased fuel' means any
transportation fuel produced from biomass.
``(3) Biobased product.--The term `biobased product' means
a commercial or industrial product (including chemicals,
materials, polymers, and animal feed) produced from biomass,
or electric power derived in connection with the conversion
of biomass to fuel.
``(4) Biomass.--
``(A) In general.--The term `biomass' means--
``(i) organic material from a plant, including grasses and
trees, that is planted for the purpose of being used to
produce energy, including vegetation produced for harvest on
land enrolled in the conservation reserve program established
under subchapter B of chapter 1 of subtitle D of title XII of
the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831 et seq.) if the
harvest is consistent with the integrity of soil and water
resources and with other environmental purposes of the
conservation reserve program;
``(ii) nonhazardous, lignocellulosic, or hemicellulosic
matter derived from--

``(I) the following forest-related resources:

``(aa) pre-commercial thinnings;
``(bb) slash; and
``(cc) brush;

``(II) an agricultural crop, crop byproduct, or
agricultural crop residue, including vegetation produced for
harvest on land enrolled in the conservation reserve program
established under subchapter B of chapter 1 of subtitle D of
title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831 et
seq.) if the harvest is consistent with the integrity of soil
and water resources and with other environmental purposes of
the conservation reserve program; or
``(III) miscellaneous waste, including landscape or right-
of-way tree trimmings; and

``(iii) agricultural animal waste.
``(B) Exclusion.--The term `biomass' does not include--
``(i) unsegregated municipal solid waste;
``(ii) incineration of municipal solid waste;
``(iii) recyclable post-consumer waste paper and paper
products;
``(iv) painted, treated, or pressurized wood;
``(v) wood contaminated with plastic or metals; or
``(vi) tires.''; and
(4) by inserting after paragraph (5) (as redesignated by
paragraph (2)):
``(6) Demonstration.--The term `demonstration' means
demonstration of technology in a pilot plant or semi-works
scale facility.''.

SEC. 102. COOPERATION AND COORDINATION IN BIOMASS RESEARCH
AND DEVELOPMENT.

Section 304 of the Biomass Research and Development Act of
2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended--
(1) in subsections (a) and (d), by striking ``industrial
products'' each place it appears and inserting ``fuels and
biobased products'';
(2) by striking subsections (b) and (c);
(3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (b); and
(4) in subsection (b)(1)(A) (as redesignated by paragraph
(3)), by striking ``an officer of the Department of
Agriculture appointed by the President to a position in the
Department before the date of the designated, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate'' and inserting: ``the
Assistant Secretary of Agriculture for Energy and Biobased
Products''.

SEC. 103. BIOMASS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD.

Section 305 of the Biomass Research and Development Act of
2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended--
(1) in subsections (a) and (c), by striking ``industrial
products'' each place it appears and inserting ``fuels and
biobased products'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``304(d)(1)(B)'' and
inserting ``304(b)(1)(B)''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``304(d)(1)(A)'' and
inserting ``304(b)(1)(A)''; and
(3) in subsection (c)--
(A) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and
inserting a semicolon; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(3) ensure that--
``(A) solicitations are open and competitive with awards
made annually; and
``(B) objectives and evaluation criteria of the
solicitations are clearly stated and minimally prescriptive,
with no areas of special interest; and
``(4) ensure that the panel of scientific and technical
peers assembled under section 307(c)(2)(C) to review
proposals is composed predominantly of independent experts
selected from outside the Departments of Agriculture and
Energy.''.

SEC. 104. BIOMASS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE.

Section 306 of the Biomass Research and Development Act of
2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (b)(1)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``biobased industrial
products'' and inserting ``biofuels'';
(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) through (J) as
subparagraphs (C) through (K), respectively;
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
``(B) an individual affiliated with the biobased industrial
and commercial products industry;'';
(D) in subparagraph (F) (as redesignated by subparagraph
(B)) by striking ``an individual'' and inserting ``2
individuals'';
(E) in subparagraphs (C), (D), (G), and (I) (as
redesignated by subparagraph (B)) by striking ``industrial
products'' each place it appears and inserting ``fuels and
biobased products''; and
(F) in subparagraph (H) (as redesignated by subparagraph
(B)), by inserting ``and environmental'' before ``analysis'';
(2) in subsection (c)(2)--
(A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``goals'' and
inserting ``objectives, purposes, and considerations'';
(B) by redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as
subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively;
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (A) the following:
``(B) solicitations are open and competitive with awards
made annually and that objectives and evaluation criteria of
the solicitations are clearly stated and minimally
prescriptive, with no areas of special interest;''; and
(D) in subparagraph (C) (as redesignated by subparagraph
(B)) by inserting ``predominantly from outside the
Departments of Agriculture and Energy'' after ``technical
peers''.

SEC. 105. BIOMASS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE.

Section 307 of the Biomass Research and Development Act of
2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``research on biobased
industrial products'' and inserting ``research on, and
development and demonstration of, biobased fuels and biobased
products, and the methods, practices and

[[Page S6308]]

technologies, including industrial biotechnology, for their
production''; and
(2) by striking subsections (b) through (e) and inserting
the following:
``(b) Agencies.--
``(1) Agriculture.--The Secretary of Agriculture, through
the point of contact of the Department of Agriculture and in
consultation with the Board, shall provide, or enter into,
grants, contracts, and financial assistance under this
section through the Cooperative State Research, Education,
and Extension Service of the Department of Agriculture.
``(2) Energy.--The Secretary of Energy, though the point of
contact of the Department of Energy and in consultation with
the Board, shall provide, or enter into, grants, contracts,
and financial assistance under this section through the
appropriate agency, as determined by the Secretary of Energy.
``(c) Objectives.--The objectives of the Initiative are to
develop--
``(1) technologies and processes necessary for abundant
commercial production of biobased fuels at prices competitive
with fossil fuels;
``(2) high-value biobased products--
``(A) to enhance the economic viability of biobased fuels
and power; and
``(B) as substitutes for petroleum-based feedstocks and
products; and
``(3) a diversity of sustainable domestic sources of
biomass for conversion to biobased fuels and biobased
products.
``(d) Purposes.--The purposes of the Initiative are--
``(1) to increase the energy security of the United States;
``(2) to create jobs and enhance the economic development
of the rural economy;
``(3) to enhance the environment and public health; and
``(4) to diversify markets for raw agricultural and
forestry products.
``(e) Technical Areas.--To advance the objectives and
purposes of the Initiative, the Secretary of Agriculture and
the Secretary of Energy, in consultation with the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and
heads of other appropriate departments and agencies (referred
to in this section as the `Secretaries'), shall direct
research and development toward--
``(1) feedstock production through the development of crops
and cropping systems relevant to production of raw materials
for conversion to biobased fuels and biobased products,
including--
``(A) development of advanced and dedicated crops with
desired features, including enhanced productivity, broader
site range, low requirements for chemical inputs, and
enhanced processing;
``(B) advanced crop production methods to achieve the
features described in subparagraph (A);
``(C) feedstock harvest, handling, transport, and storage;
and
``(D) strategies for integrating feedstock production into
existing managed land;
``(2) overcoming recalcitrance of cellulosic biomass
through developing technologies for converting cellulosic
biomass into intermediates that can subsequently be converted
into biobased fuels and biobased products, including--
``(A) pretreatment in combination with enzymatic or
microbial hydrolysis; and
``(B) thermochemical approaches, including gasification and
pyrolysis;
``(3) product diversification through technologies relevant
to production of a range of biobased products (including
chemicals, animal feeds, and cogenerated power) that
eventually can increase the feasibility of fuel production in
a biorefinery, including--
``(A) catalytic processing, including thermochemical fuel
production;
``(B) metabolic engineering, enzyme engineering, and
fermentation systems for biological production of desired
products or cogeneration of power;
``(C) product recovery;
``(D) power production technologies; and
``(E) integration into existing biomass processing
facilities, including starch ethanol plants, paper mills, and
power plants; and
``(4) analysis that provides strategic guidance for the
application of biomass technologies in accordance with
realization of societal benefits in improved sustainability
and environmental quality, cost effectiveness, security, and
rural economic development, usually featuring system-wide
approaches.
``(f) Additional Considerations.--Within the technical
areas described in subsection (e), and in addition to
advancing the purposes described in subsection (d) and the
objectives described in subsection (c), the Secretaries shall
support research and development--
``(1) to create continuously expanding opportunities for
participants in existing biofuels production by seeking
synergies and continuity with current technologies and
practices, including the use of dried distillers grains as a
bridge feedstock;
``(2) to maximize the environmental, economic, and social
benefits of production of biobased fuels and biobased
products on a large scale through life-cycle economic and
environmental analysis and other means; and
``(3) to assess the potential of Federal land and land
management programs as feedstock resources for biobased fuels
and biobased products, consistent with the integrity of soil
and water resources and with other environmental
considerations.
``(g) Eligible Entities.--To be eligible for a grant,
contract, or assistance under this section, an applicant
shall be--
``(1) an institution of higher education;
``(2) a national laboratory;
``(3) a Federal research agency;
``(4) a State research agency;
``(5) a private sector entity;
``(6) a nonprofit organization; or
``(7) a consortium of 2 of more entities described in
paragraphs (1) through (6).
``(h) Administration.--
``(1) In general.--After consultation with the Board, the
points of contact shall--
``(A) publish annually 1 or more joint requests for
proposals for grants, contracts, and assistance under this
section;
``(B) establish a priority in grants, contracts, and
assistance under this section for research that advances the
objectives, purposes, and additional considerations of this
title;
``(C) require that grants, contracts, and assistance under
this section be awarded competitively, on the basis of merit,
after the establishment of procedures that provide for
scientific peer review by an independent panel of scientific
and technical peers; and
``(D) give some preference to applications that--
``(i) involve a consortia of experts from multiple
institutions;
``(ii) encourage the integration of disciplines and
application of the best technical resources; and
``(iii) increase the geographic diversity of demonstration
projects.
``(2) Distribution of funding by technical area.--Of the
funds authorized to be appropriated for activities described
in this section--
``(A) 20 percent shall be used to carry out activities for
feedstock production under subsection (e)(1);
``(B) 45 percent shall be used to carry out activities for
overcoming recalcitrance of cellulosic biomass under
subsection (e)(2);
``(C) 30 percent shall be used to carry out activities for
product diversification under subsection (e)(3); and
``(D) 5 percent shall be used to carry out activities for
strategic guidance under subsection (e)(4).
``(3) Distribution of funding within each technical area.--
Within each technical area described in paragraphs (1)
through (3) of subsection (e)--
``(A) 15 percent of funds shall be used for applied
fundamentals;
``(B) 35 percent of funds shall be used for innovation; and
``(C) 50 percent of funds shall be used for demonstration.
``(4) Matching funds.--
``(A) In general.--A minimum 20 percent funding match shall
be required for demonstration projects under this title.
``(B) No other requirement.--No matching funds shall be
required for other activities under this title.
``(5) Technology and information transfer to agricultural
users.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator of the Cooperative
State Research, Education, and Extension Service and the
Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service shall
ensure that applicable research results and technologies from
the Initiative are adapted, made available, and disseminated
through those services, as appropriate.
``(B) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this paragraph, and every 2 years thereafter,
the Administrator of the Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service and the Chief of the Natural
Resources Conservation Service shall submit to the committees
of Congress with jurisdiction over the Initiative a report
describing the activities conducted by the services under
this subsection.''.

SEC. 106. REPORTS.

Section 309 of the Biomass Research and Development Act of
2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) in paragraph (2), by striking ``industrial product''
and inserting ``fuels and biobased products''; and
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``industrial products''
each place it appears and inserting ``fuels and biobased
products'';
(2) by redesignating subsection (b) as subsection (c);
(3) by inserting after subsection (a) the following:
``(b) Assessment Report and Strategic Plan.--Not later than
1 year after the date of enactment of the National Security
and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005, the Secretary and the
Secretary of Energy shall jointly submit to Congress a report
that--
``(1) describes the status and progress of current research
and development efforts in both the Federal Government and
private sector in achieving the objectives, purposes, and
considerations of this title, specifically addressing each of
the technical areas identified in section 307(e);
``(2) describes the actions taken to implement the
improvements directed by this title; and
``(3) outlines a strategic plan for achieving the
objectives, purposes, and considerations of this title.'';
and
(4) in subsection (c) (as redesignated by paragraph (2))--
(A) in paragraph (1)--

[[Page S6309]]

(i) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``purposes described
in section 307(b)'' and inserting ``objectives, purposes, and
additional considerations described in subsections (c)
through (f) of section 307'';
(ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(iii) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph
(D); and
(iv) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) achieves the distribution of funds described in
paragraphs (2) and (3) of section 307(h); and''; and
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``industrial products''
and inserting ``fuels and biobased products''.

SEC. 107. FUNDING.

(a) Funding.--Section 310(a)(2) of the Biomass Research and
Development Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101
note) is amended by striking ``$14,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2003 through 2007'' and inserting ``$200,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 310(b) of the
Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-
224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended by striking ``title
$54,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2007'' and
inserting``title $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2011 and each
fiscal year thereafter''.

SEC. 108. TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.

The Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000 (Public
Law 106-224; 7 U.S.C. 8101 note) is amended by striking
section 311.

SEC. 109. BIOMASS-DERIVED HYDROGEN.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall conduct a research,
development, and demonstration program focused on the
economic production and use of hydrogen from biofuels, with
emphasis on the rural transportation and rural electrical
generation sectors.
(b) Transportation Sector Objectives.--The objectives of
the program in the transportation sector shall be to--
(1) conduct research, and to develop and test processes and
equipment, to produce low-cost liquid biobased fuels that can
be transported to distant fueling stations for the production
of hydrogen or for direct use in conventional internal
combustion engine vehicles;
(2) demonstrate the cost-effective production of hydrogen
from liquid biobased fuels at the local fueling station, to
eliminate the costs of transporting hydrogen long distances
or building hydrogen pipeline networks;
(3) demonstrate the use of hydrogen derived from liquid
biobased fuels in fuel cell vehicles, or, as an interim cost-
reduction option, in internal combustion engine hybrid
electric vehicles, to demonstrate sustainable transportation
with significantly reduced local air pollution, greenhouse
gas emissions, and dependence on imported fossil fuels;
(4) evaluate the economic return to agricultural producers
producing feedstocks for liquid biobased fuels compared to
agricultural producer returns as of the date of enactment of
this Act;
(5) evaluate the crop yield and long-term soil
sustainability of growing and harvesting feedstocks for
liquid biobased fuels; and
(6) evaluate the fuel costs to fuel cell car owners (or
hybrid electric car owners running on hydrogen) per mile
driven compared to burning gasoline in conventional vehicles.
(c) Electrical Generation Sector Objectives.--The
objectives of the program in the rural electrical generation
sector shall be to--
(1) design, develop, and test low-cost gasification
equipment to convert biomass to hydrogen at regional rural
cooperatives, or at businesses owned by farmers, close to
agricultural operations to minimize the cost of biomass
transportation to large central gasification plants;
(2) demonstrate low-cost electrical generation at such
rural cooperatives or farmer-owned businesses, using
renewable hydrogen derived from biomass in either fuel cell
generators, or, as an interim cost reduction option, in
conventional internal combustion engine gensets;
(3) determine the economic return to cooperatives or other
businesses owned by farmers of producing hydrogen from
biomass and selling electricity compared to agricultural
economic returns from producing and selling conventional
crops alone;
(4) evaluate the crop yield and long-term soil
sustainability of growing and harvesting of feedstocks for
biomass gasification, and
(5) demonstrate the use of a portion of the biomass-derived
hydrogen in various agricultural vehicles to reduce--
(A) dependence on imported fossil fuel; and
(B) environmental impacts.
(d) Authorization for Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010.

TITLE II--PRODUCTION INCENTIVES

SEC. 201. PRODUCTION INCENTIVES.

(a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to--
(1) accelerate deployment and commercialization of
biofuels;
(2) deliver the first 1,000,000,000 gallons of cellulosic
biofuels by 2015;
(3) ensure biofuels produced after 2015 are cost
competitive with gasoline and diesel; and
(4) ensure that small feedstock producers and rural small
businesses are full participants in the development of the
cellulosic biofuels industry.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Cellulosic biofuels.--The term ``cellulosic biofuels''
means any fuel that is produced from cellulosic feedstocks.
(2) Eligible entity.--The term ``eligible entity'' means a
producer of fuel from cellulosic biofuels the production
facility of which--
(A) is located in the United States;
(B) meets all applicable Federal and State permitting
requirements;
(C) is to begin production of cellulosic biofuels not later
than 3 years after the date of the reverse auction in which
the producer participates; and
(D) meets any financial criteria established by the
Secretary.
(c) Program.--
(1) Establishment.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Defense, and the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, shall
establish an incentive program for the production of
cellulosic biofuels.
(2) Basis of incentives.--Under the program, the Secretary
shall award production incentives on a per gallon basis of
cellulosic biofuels from eligible entities, through--
(A) set payments per gallon of cellulosic biofuels produced
in an amount determined by the Secretary, until initiation of
the first reverse auction; and
(B) reverse auction thereafter.
(3) First reverse auction.--The first reverse auction shall
be held on the earlier of--
(A) not later than 1 year after the first year of annual
production in the United States of 100,000,000 gallons of
cellulosic biofuels, as determined by the Secretary; or
(B) not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of
this Act.
(4) Reverse auction procedure.--
(A) In general.--On initiation of the first reverse
auction, and each year thereafter until the earlier of the
first year of annual production in the United States of
1,000,000,000 gallons of cellulosic biofuels, as determined
by the Secretary, or 10 years after the date of enactment of
this Act, the Secretary shall conduct a reverse auction at
which--
(i) the Secretary shall solicit bids from eligible
entities;
(ii) eligible entities shall submit--

(I) a desired level of production incentive on a per gallon
basis; and
(II) an estimated annual production amount in gallons; and

(iii) the Secretary shall issue awards for the production
amount submitted, beginning with the eligible entity
submitting the bid for the lowest level of production
incentive on a per gallon basis, until the amount of funds
available for the reverse auction is committed.
(B) Amount of incentive received.--An eligible entity
selected by the Secretary through a reverse auction shall
receive the amount of performance incentive requested in the
auction for each gallon produced and sold by the entity
during the first 6 years of operation.
(d) Limitations.--Awards under this section shall be
limited to--
(1) a per gallon amount determined by the Secretary during
the first 4 years of the program;
(2) a declining per gallon cap over the remaining lifetime
of the program, to be established by the Secretary so that
cellulosic biofuels produced after the first year of annual
cellulosic biofuels production in the United States in excess
of 1,000,000,000 gallons are cost competitive with gasoline
and diesel;
(3) not more than 25 percent of the funds committed within
each reverse auction to any 1 project;
(4) not more than $100,000,000 in any 1 year; and
(5) not more than $1,000,000,000 over the lifetime of the
program.
(e) Priority.--In selecting a project under the program,
the Secretary shall give priority to projects that--
(1) demonstrate outstanding potential for local and
regional economic development;
(2) include agricultural producers or cooperatives of
agricultural producers as equity partners in the ventures;
and
(3) have a strategic agreement in place to fairly reward
feedstock suppliers.
(f) Funding.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall use to carry out this
title $250,000,000 of funds of the Commodity Credit
Corporation, to remain available until expended.
(2) Authorizations of appropriations.--In addition to
amounts made available under paragraph (1), there are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to
carry out this section.

TITLE III--ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE FOR ENERGY AND BIOBASED
PRODUCTS

SEC. 301. ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE FOR ENERGY AND
BIOBASED PRODUCTS.

(a) Establishment.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish in the
Department a position of Assistant Secretary of Agriculture
for Energy and Biobased Products (referred to in this section
as the ``Assistant Secretary'').
(b) Responsibilities.--The Assistant Secretary shall be
responsible for--

[[Page S6310]]

(1) the energy programs established under title IX of the
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8101
et seq.); and
(2) all other programs and initiatives that the Secretary
considers appropriate.
(c) Confirmation Requirement.--The Assistant Secretary
shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice
and consent of the Senate.
(d) Personnel.--The Secretary, acting through the Assistant
Secretary, may transfer or assign work to personnel, or
assign staff hours, on a permanent or a part-time basis, as
needed, to the Office of the Assistant Secretary to carry out
the functions and duties of the office.
(e) Budget.--The Secretary shall establish a budget for the
office of the Assistant Secretary.

TITLE IV--PROCUREMENT OF BIOBASED PRODUCTS

SEC. 401. FEDERAL PROCUREMENT.

(a) Definition of Procuring Agency.--Section 9001 of the
Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C.
8101) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) as
paragraphs (5), (6), and (7), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) Procuring agency.--The term `procuring agency'
means--
``(A) any Federal agency that is using Federal funds for
procurement; or
``(B) any person contracting with any Federal agency with
respect to work performed under the contract.''.
(b) Procurement.--Section 9002 of the Farm Security and
Rural Investment Act of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8102) is amended--
(1) by striking ``Federal agency'' each place it appears
(other than in subsections (f) and (g)) and inserting
``procuring agency'';
(2) in subsection (c)(2)--
(A) by striking ``(2)'' and all that follows through
``Notwithstanding'' and inserting the following:
``(2) Flexibility.--Notwithstanding'';
(B) by striking ``an agency'' and inserting ``a procuring
agency''; and
(C) by striking ``the agency'' and inserting ``the
procuring agency'';
(3) in subsection (d), by striking ``procured by Federal
agencies'' and inserting ``procured by procuring agencies'';
and
(4) in subsection (f), by striking ``Federal agencies'' and
inserting ``procuring agencies'' .

SEC. 402. CAPITOL COMPLEX PROCUREMENT.

Section 9002 of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act
of 2002 (7 U.S.C. 8102) (as amended by section 401(b)) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (j) as subsection (k); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (i) the following:
``(j) Inclusion.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
enactment of the National Security and Bioenergy Investment
Act of 2005, the Architect of the Capitol, the Sergeant of
Arms of the Senate, and the Chief Administrative Officer of
the House of Representatives shall issue regulations that
apply the requirements of this section to procurement for the
Capitol Complex.''.

SEC. 403. EDUCATION .

(a) In General.--The Architect of the Capitol shall
establish in the Capitol Complex a program of public
education regarding use by the Architect of the Capitol of
biobased products.
(b) Purposes.--The purposes of the program shall be--
(1) to establish the Capitol Complex as a showcase for the
existence and benefits of biobased products; and
(2) to provide access to further information on biobased
products to occupants and visitors.

SEC. 404. REGULATIONS.

Requirements issued under the amendment made by section 402
shall be made in accordance with regulations issued by the
Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate and the
Committee on House Administration of the House of
Representatives.

TITLE V--BIOECONOMY GRANTS AND TAX INCENTIVES

SEC. 501. SMALL BUSINESS BIOPRODUCT MARKETING AND
CERTIFICATION GRANTS.

(a) In General.--Using amounts made available under
subsection (g), the Secretary shall make available on a
competitive basis grants to eligible entities described in
subsection (b) for the biobased product marketing and
certification purposes described in subsection (c).
(b) Eligible Entities.--An entity eligible for a grant
under this section is any manufacturer of biobased products
that--
(1) has fewer than 50 employees;
(2) proposes to use the grant for the biobased product
marketing and certification purposes described in subsection
(c); and
(3) has not previously received a grant under this section.
(c) Biobased Product Marketing and Certification Grant
Purposes.--A grant made under this section shall be used--
(1) to plan activities and working capital for marketing of
biobased products; and
(2) to provide private sector cost sharing for the
certification of biobased products.
(d) Matching Funds.--
(1) In general.--Grant recipients shall provide matching
non-Federal funds equal to the amount of the grant received.
(2) Expenditure.--Matching funds shall be expended in
advance of grant funding, so that for every dollar of grant
that is advanced, an equal amount of matching funds shall
have been funded prior to submitting the request for
reimbursement.
(e) Amount.--A grant made under this section shall not
exceed $100,000.
(f) Administration.--The Secretary shall establish such
administrative requirements for grants under this section,
including requirements for applications for the grants, as
the Secretary considers appropriate.
(g) Authorizations of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to make grants under this section--
(1) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
(2) such sums as are necessary for fiscal year 2007 and
each subsequent fiscal year.

SEC. 502. REGIONAL BIOECONOMY DEVELOPMENT GRANTS.

(a) In General.--Using amounts made available under
subsection (g), the Secretary shall make available on a
competitive basis grants to eligible entities described in
subsection (b) for the purposes described in subsection (c).
(b) Eligible Entities.--An entity eligible for a grant
under this section is any regional bioeconomy development
association, agricultural or energy trade association, or
Land Grant institution that--
(1) proposes to use the grant for the purposes described in
subsection (c); and
(2) has not previously received a grant under this section.
(c) Regional Bioeconomy Development Association Grant
Purposes.--A grant made under this section shall be used to
support and promote the growth and development of the
bioeconomy within the region served by the eligible entity,
through coordination, education, outreach, and other
endeavors by the eligible entity.
(d) Matching Funds.--
(1) In general.--Grant recipients shall provide matching
non-Federal funds equal to the amount of the grant received.
(2) Expenditure.--Matching funds shall be expended in
advance of grant funding, so that for every dollar of grant
that is advanced, an equal amount of matching funds shall
have been funded prior to submitting the request for
reimbursement.
(e) Administration.--The Secretary shall establish such
administrative requirements for grants under this section,
including requirements for applications for the grants, as
the Secretary considers appropriate.
(f) Amount.--A grant made under this section shall not
exceed $500,000.
(g) Authorizations of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated to make grants under this section--
(1) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
(2) such sums as are necessary for fiscal year 2007 and
each subsequent fiscal year.

SEC. 503. PREPROCESSING AND HARVESTING DEMONSTRATION GRANTS.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall make grants available
on a competitive basis to enterprises owned by agricultural
producers, for the purposes of demonstrating cost-effective,
cellulosic biomass innovations in--
(1) preprocessing of feedstocks, including cleaning,
separating and sorting, mixing or blending, and chemical or
biochemical treatments, to add value and lower the cost of
feedstock processing at a biorefinery; or
(2) 1-pass or other efficient, multiple crop harvesting
techniques.
(b) Limitations on Grants.--
(1) Number of grants.--Not more than 5 demonstration
projects per fiscal year shall be funded under this section.
(2) Non-federal cost share.--The non-Federal cost share of
a project under this section shall be not less than 20
percent, as determined by the Secretary.
(c) Condition of Grant.--To be eligible for a grant for a
project under this section, a recipient of a grant or a
participating entity shall agree to use the material
harvested under the project--
(1) to produce ethanol; or
(2) for another energy purpose, such as the generation of
heat or electricity.
(d) Authorization for Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $5,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010.

SEC. 504. SENSE OF THE SENATE.

It is the sense of the Senate that Congress should amend
the Federal tax code to encourage investment in, and
production and use of, biobased fuels and biobased products
through--
(1) an investment tax credit for the construction or
modification of facilities for the production of fuels from
cellulose biomass, to drive private capital towards new
biorefinery projects in a manner that allows participation by
smaller farms and cooperatives; and
(2) an investment tax credit to small manufacturers of
biobased products to lower the capital costs of starting and
maintaining a biobased business.

TITLE VI--OTHER PROVISIONS

SEC. 601. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH.

(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish, within the
Department or through an independent contracting entity, a
program of education and outreach on biobased fuels and
biobased products consisting of--
(1) training and technical assistance programs for
feedstock producers to promote producer ownership,
investment, and participation in the operation of processing
facilities; and

[[Page S6311]]

(2) public education and outreach to familiarize consumers
with the biobased fuels and biobased products.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this title $1,000,000 for
each of fiscal years 2006 through 2010.

SEC. 602. REPORTS.

(a) Progress Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the
Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and
the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the
Senate a report on progress in establishing the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of Agriculture for Energy and Biobased
Products under title I.
(b) Biobased Product Potential.--Not later than 1 year
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
submit to the Committee on Agriculture of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry of the Senate a report that--
(1) describes the economic potential for the United States
of the widespread production and use of commercial and
industrial biobased products through calendar year 2025; and
(2) as the maximum extent practicable, identifies the
economic potential by product area.
(c) Analysis of Economic Indicators.--Not later than 2
years after the date of enactment of this Act, and every 2
years thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to Congress an
analysis of economic indicators of the biobased economy
during the 2-year period preceding the analysis.
____

June 9, 2005.
Hon. Tom Harkin,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Richard Lugar,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Re the National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of
2005.

Dear Senators Harkin and Lugar: The National Corn Growers
Association (NCGA), the American Soybean Association (ASA),
and the Renewable Fuels Association are writing to express
our support for the National Security and Bioenergy
Investment Act of 2005. In particular, we strongly support
the increased procurement of biobased products by Federal
agencies and all Federal government contractors. Biobased
products represent a large potential growth market for corn
and soybean growers in areas such as plastics, solvents,
packaging and other consumer goods to provide markets for
U.S.-grown crops. The biobased product industry has already
started to grow, bringing new products to consumers, new
markets to growers and new investments to our communities.
The procurement of biobased products promotes energy and
environmental security. Products made from corn and soybeans
could replace a variety of items currently produced from
petroleum, and aid in reducing dependence on imported oil.
Already the production of ethanol and biodiesel reduces
imports by more than 140 million barrels of oil. The
production of biobased products generates less greenhouse gas
than traditional petroleum-based items. There are also
tremendous opportunities for grower-owned processing
facilities and rural American and agriculture as a whole. New
jobs and investments will be brought into rural communities,
as new processing and manufacturing facilities move into
those communities to be near renewable feed stocks.
NCGA, ASA and RFA applaud your continued efforts to promote
the use of biobased products that will encourage the
development of new markets for corn and soybeans and
ultimately help to revitalize rural economies and the
agriculture industry as a whole. We have been avid supporters
of the biobased products industry, and we look forward to
working with you as you continue to provide vision and
direction for this emerging industry.
Sincerely,
Leon Corzine,
President, National Corn Growers Association.
Neal Bredehoeft,
President, American Soybean Association.
Bob Dinneen,
President, Renewable Fuels Association.
____

Governors' Ethanol Coalition,

Lincoln, NE, June 9, 2005.
Hon. Tom Harkin,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Barack Obama,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Richard Lugar,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Hon. Norm Coleman,
Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senators: On behalf of the thirty members of the
Governors' Ethanol Coalition, we strongly support and endorse
the National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005,
as well as your efforts to expand development of other
biofue1s and co-products. The Governors' Ethanol Coalition is
pleased that this bill embodies the recommendations developed
by the Coalition in Ethanol From Biomass, America's 21st
Century Transportation Fuel. When signed into law, this act
will catalyze needed research, production, and use of
biofue1s and bio-based products, thereby enhancing our
economic, environmental, and national security.
The Coalition believes that the nation's dependency on
imported oil presents a huge risk to this country's future.
The combination of political tensions in major oi1-producing
nations with growing oil demand from China and India is
seriously threatening our national security. Moreover, as we
import greater amounts of oil each year, we are draining more
and more of the wealth from our states.
The key provisions contained in your bill bring focus and
resources to biomass-derived ethanol research and
commercialization efforts. The result, over time, will be the
replacement of significant amounts of imported oil with
domestically produced fuels--improving our rural economies,
cleaning our air, and contributing to our national security.
Of particular importance is the bill's aim to broaden ethanol
production to include all regions of the nation so that many
more states will reap the benefits of biofuels.
Again, thank you for inclusion of the Coalition's
recommendations in this landmark legislation. Please let us
know how the Coalition can help with the passage of this very
important legislation. The continued expansion of ethanol
production and use, particularly biomass-derived fuels, and
the accompanying economic growth and environmental benefits
for our states is essential to the nation's long-term
economic vitality and national security.
Sincere1y,
Tim Pawlenty,
Chair, Governor of Minnesota.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Vice Chair, Governor of Kansas.
____

Energy Future^SM Coalition,

Washington, DC, June 8, 2005.
Hon. Tom Harkin,
Hon. Richard G. Lugar,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senators Harkin and Lugar: On behalf of the Energy
Future Coalition, I am writing to commend your leadership and
vision in drafting the National Security and Bioenergy
Investment Act of 2005.
In our judgment, America's growing dependence on foreign
oil endangers our national and economic security. We believe
the Federal government should undertake a major new
initiative to curtail U.S. oil consumption through improved
efficiency and the rapid development and deployment of
advanced biomass, alcohol and other available petroleum fuel
alternatives.
With such a push, we believe domestic biofuels can cut the
nation's oil use by 25 percent by 2025, and substantial
further reductions are possible through efficiency gains from
advanced technologies. That is an ambitious goal, but it is
also an extraordinary opportunity for American leadership,
innovation, job creation, and economic growth.
You took an important step forward by introducing S. 650,
the Fuels Security Act, incorporated into the Senate energy
bill during Committee markup. This legislation is another
important step, authorizing the additional research and
development and federal incentives needed to accelerate the
adoption of biobased fuels and coproducts. We are pleased to
support it.
Sincerely,
Reid Detchon.
____

Biotechnology Industry

Organization,

Washington, DC, June 8, 2005.
Hon. Tom Harkin,
Ranking Democratic Member.
Hon. Richard Lugar,
Member, U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and
Forestry, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senators Harkin and Lugar: The Biotechnology Industry
Organization (BIO) Industrial and Environmental Section fully
supports the National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act
of 2005. We greatly appreciate your vision and initiative to
expand the Biomass Research and Development Act and to create
new incentives to produce biofuels and biobased products.
America's growing dependence on foreign energy is eroding
our national security. We must take steps to drastically
increase production of domestic energy. As an active
participant in the Energy Future Coalition, BIO believes this
country needs a major new initiative to more aggressively
research, develop and deploy advanced biofuels technologies.
With sufficient government support, we can meet up to 25% of
our transportation fuel needs by converting farm crops and
crop residues to transportation fuel.
The National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005
will boost the use of industrial biotechnology to produce
fuels and biobased products from renewable agricultural
feedstocks. With the use of new biotech tools, we can now
utilize millions of tons of crop residues, such as corn
stover and wheat straw, to produce sugars that can then be
converted to ethanol, chemicals and bio-based plastics. These
biotech tools can only be rapidly deployed if federal policy
makers take steps to help our innovative companies get over
the initial hurdles they face during

[[Page S6312]]

the commercialization phase of bioenergy production and your
bill will help get that job done.
We are pleased to endorse this visionary legislation.
Sincerely,
Brent Erickson,
Executive Vice President, Biotechnology Industry
Organization.
____

Natural Resources Defense Council,

Washington, DC, June 7, 2005.
Dear Senators Harkin and Lugar: The Natural Resources
Defense Council strongly supports the National Security and
Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005, which you introduced today.
This important bill would expand and refine research,
development, demonstration and deployment efforts for the
production of energy from crops grown by farmers here in
America. The bill would also expand and improve the
Department of Agriculture's efforts to promote a biobased
economy, federal bio-energy and bio-product purchasing
requirements, and federal educational efforts.
The Research and Development (R&D) title of this bill
continues your tradition of leadership in this area by
updating the Biomass Research and Development Act of 2000,
which you also crafted. This title will not only extend the
provisions of the original bill and greatly increase the
funding for these provisions, it will also refine the
direction of this funding. Taken together, these changes
maximize the impacts of R&D on the greatest challenges facing
cellulosic biofuels today.
Your bill also creates extremely important production
incentives for the first one billion gallons of cellulosic
biofuels. The production incentives approach taken by the
bill--a combination of fixed incentives per gallon at first,
switching over to a reverse auction--will maximize the
development of cellulosic biofuels production while
minimizing the cost to taxpayers.
In addition, the bill creates an Assistant Secretary of
Agriculture for Energy and Biobased Products. Coupled with
the bill's development grants, tax incentives, biobased
product procurement provisions, and educational program, the
bill would make a huge contribution to developing a
sustainable biobased economy, reducing our oil dependence and
improving our national security.
The technologies advanced by this bill will undoubtedly
make important contributions to reducing our global warming
pollution and the air and water pollution that comes from our
dependence on fossil fuels. We are concerned, however, that
the eligibility provisions for forest biomass do not exclude
sensitive areas that need protecting, including roadless
areas, old growth forests, and other endangered forests, and
do not restrict eligibility to renewable sources or prohibit
possible conversion of native forests to plantations. We know
that you do not want to see this admirable legislation
applied in ways that exploit these features, and will be
happy to work with you in the future to take any steps needed
if abuses arise.
Sincerely,
Karen Wayland,
Legislative Director.
____

Environmental Law and

Policy Center,

Chicago, IL, June 8, 2005.
Hon. Tom Harkin,
Hon. Richard G. Lugar,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senators Harkin and Lugar: The Environmental Law and
Policy Center (``ELPC'') is pleased to support the National
Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005, and we commend
you for your leadership and vision in introducing this
legislation. This bill would accelerate research,
development, demonstration and production efforts for energy
from farm crops in the United States, especially cellulosic
ethanol. It also will expand and prioritize the United States
Department of Agriculture's leadership responsibilities to
promote clean and sustainable energy development, and it will
increase procurement of biobased products.
By significantly expanding the development and production
of clean energy ``cash crops,'' this legislation will improve
our environmental quality, stimulate significant rural
economic development, and strengthen our national energy
security. ELPC also appreciates that this legislation
reflects your longstanding support for farm-based sustainable
energy programs. ELPC strongly supported your successful
efforts to create the new Energy Title in the 2002 Farm Bill,
which established groundbreaking new federal incentives for
renewable energy and energy efficiency, while renewing
existing programs such as the Biomass Research and
Development Act of 2000.
The National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005
is a natural complement to the 2002 Farm Bill Energy Title
programs, and it will help to strengthen support for the
right bioenergy production programs in the 2007 Farm Bill.
Accordingly, ELPC is pleased to support this legislation.
Very truly yours,
Howard A. Learner,
Executive Director.
____

Institute for Local Self-Reliance,

Washington, DC, June 6, 2005.
Hon. Tom Harkin,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Tom Harkin: Congratulations on your bill,
National Security and Bioenergy Investment Act of 2005. It is
a breakthrough piece of legislation. Your well-conceived
bill, combining needed executive branch changes, welcome
increases in research and development funding and innovative
commercialization techniques, can move the use of plants as a
fuel and industrial material from the margins of the economy
to the mainstream. I urge everyone with an interest in our
environmental, agricultural and economic future to support
this bill.
Sincerely,
David Morris,
Vice President.
______

By Mr. BINGAMAN:
S. 1211. A bill to establish an Office of Foreign Science and
Technology Assessment to enable the United States to effectively
analyze trends in foreign science and technology, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on foreign Relations.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President--I rise today to introduce a bill that
would establish a capability within the State Department Science
Advisor's Office to assess science and technology outside the United
States.
Over the past two years I have traveled to Taiwan, China and India to
better understand why these developing countries' economies were
growing so rapidly. I learned that in all cases the primary reason for
their robust growth was the emergence of a well-trained science and
engineering workforce that tied directly into their highly competitive
innovation economies.
For instance, Taiwan now leads the world in general purpose foundry
computer chip facilities, controlling about 70 percent of the world
market. A recent Defense Science Board Report entitled ``High
Performance Microchip Supply'' notes that by the end of 2005 there will
be 59 300mm chip fabrication plants with only 16 of these located in
the United States. The number of U.S. plants has remained constant for
the past two years, so as the number of Asian foundries has risen, the
share of these advanced chip making facilities has declined from 30 to
20 percent. This report also notes that capital expenditures in the
U.S. chip industry has fallen from a high of 42 percent in 2001 to 33
percent in 2004. Conversely, Taiwan's investment has increased from 15
percent in 2002 to 20 percent of the world's capital expenditure in
chip facilities and now leads Korea, Japan, and Europe.
There is a good explanation as to why countries such as Taiwan are
rapidly rising in the high-technology world. Since 1984 Taiwan has made
steady increases in their investments in the building of science based
research parks. Hsinchu, their flagship science park, now has over 324
high technology companies, generating over $22 billion annually in
gross revenues, and employing a high technology work force exceeding
100,000. This science park is bounded by two universities and contains
six national laboratories. Taiwan is now building science parks in the
middle and south of the island to concentrate on other fields such as
nanoscience, optoelectronics, and biotechnology. These parks are the
result of a number of carefully crafted government policies and
incentives dealing with taxes, real estate, and fundamental research.
In the area of technology transfer, the Taiwan government helped set up
the world famous Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) which
has over 5,000 scientists working to spin out laboratory ideas across
the ``valley of death'' into new industries. Remarkably, the two chip
foundry companies which now control 70 percent of the world's foundry
market were launched from ITRI. As a result of this rapid economic
growth, Taiwan's technical universities are now world class with their
own excellent graduate programs. The reason they are side-by-side with
these large science parks is to supply a steady stream of talented
researchers.
Recently, our National Academy of Sciences noted in its report,
``International Graduate Students and Postdoctoral Scholars,'' that
Taiwan's domestic economic growth has led to fewer Taiwanese students
applying to U.S. graduate schools. For the past two decades, Taiwan's
students were the core supply of talent in our innovative science and
engineering graduate school programs. Of equal concern, the successful
Taiwanese scholars who attended graduate school in the United States 20
or 30 years ago are now returning home and giving back their

[[Page S6313]]

professional wisdom to advance on their birth country's high-technology
leadership.
This same story holds true for India. My visit there this January
yielded similar observations on their rapidly developing high
technology sector. Since 1990, India has invested in the development of
software and technology parks and currently has over 40 spread
throughout the country. These parks were responsible for much of the
high technology development in software and biotechnology. Indeed,
multinational companies such as Intel, Microsoft and GE have built
large research centers there to tap into the intellectual power
educated at the Indian Institutes of Technology and the Indian
Institute of Science. GE's Jack Welch R&D Center in Bangalore has 2,300
Ph.D.'s conducting research in all aspects of their product lines.
India's GE center now directs their plastics plant in Indiana on how to
operate more efficiently in real time over the internet. Intel's
research center has 2,000 product engineers designing the chips
Americans will use in our computers and home entertainment centers next
holiday season. The chips designed at Intel's Bangalore center are
fabricated at their plant in Albuquerque. The tables have turned rather
dramatically. We used to design the chips here and then they were
manufactured overseas.

When I visited Infosys, one of India's largest software companies, I
was advised that in 2004 they received 1.2 million on-line employment
applications, gave a standardized test to 300,000 job seekers
interviewed 30,000, and then hired 10,000. They expect to repeat this
same process again this year, which illustrates the deep pool of well
trained talent that India has available. A number of the India's
leading biotech entrepreneurs I visited with told me they weren't so
much afraid of losing talent to the U.S. as they were to Singapore,
with its burgeoning government investments in biotechnology.
Similar to Taiwan, the National Academy report also documents a rapid
drop in Indian student applications to U.S. graduate schools. India's
rapidly developing economy encourages the best and brightest students
to stay home and study in India rather than consider U.S. graduate
schools. For the past 20 years, we have relied on this influx of the
cream of the academic crop I from India and Taiwan to form the high-
tech startup companies of Silicon Valley.
The stark question before us--whether it involves India, Taiwan,
China, or Singapore is: are we missing the bigger picture? By the time
we realize we have a problem in innovation and our investments in
science and engineering investments, will it be too late? Will these
Pacific Rim countries have climbed past us up the value chain, and will
they be able to produce equally innovative high technology product at
far cheaper costs?
The bill I am introducing today, may be small, but the consequences
are enormous. This measure proposes to authorize a capability in the
office of the Science Advisor to the Secretary of State to conduct
assessments of the science and technology capabilities in other
countries such as India, China and Taiwan.
The director of this office will report to the Secretary of State's
Science Advisor. The office will to the maximum extent possible utilize
firms that can conduct science and technology assessments in the
country of interest to minimize and augment the federal staff. That is
why I have proposed giving the office generous contracting authorities
with respect to soliciting contracts and disbursing funds so that it
may move quickly to gather information on certain topics so that we as
a nation are not caught by surprise by an advance in a high technology
area.
Additionally, this legislation authorizes a Foreign Science and
Technology Assessment Panel whose purpose is to look over the horizon
and choose topics and technologies to assess, as well as to evaluate
the timeliness and quality of the reports generated. These reports are
to be publicly available, benefiting not only our government by
ensuring the nation's leadership in science and engineering, but also
our private sector, especially those high technology firms that must
successfully compete in a fierce global market. The panel members, to
be selected by the Secretary of State in consultation with the Director
of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, will be distinguished
leaders who have expert knowledge about our competitors' capabilities
in science and technology.
High technology moves at a rapid rate, and every sign I picked up
from my science and technology trips to China, India, Taiwan and Japan
indicates to me that our government seems to be asleep at the switch
here at home with regard to understanding how quickly these countries
are moving up the value chain from simple manufacturing to sustained
efforts in science and engineering that matches if not exceeds us in
the innovation cycle. This bill, while a small step forward, will serve
to ensure that we constantly assess where other countries are in that
value chain and to make sure we are doing everything possible to
maintain our leadership in fields of high technology.
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. 1211

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 ``Foreign Science and
Technology Assessment Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. OFFICE OF FOREIGN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT.

(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
Department of State an Office of Foreign Science and
Technology Assessment.
(b) Director.--The head of the Office shall be a Director,
who shall be the Science Advisor to the Secretary of State.
(c) Purpose.--The purpose of the Office shall be to assess
foreign science and technologies that have the capability to
cause a loss of high technology industrial leadership in the
United States.
(d) Operation.--In preparing an assessment of science and
technology for a foreign country, the Director shall utilize,
to the extent feasible, United States entities capable of
operating effectively within such foreign country.
(e) Availability of Assessments.--The Director shall make
each assessment of foreign science and technology prepared by
the Office available to the public in a timely manner.
(f) Authorities.--In order to gain access to technical
knowledge, skills, and expertise necessary to prepare an
assessment of foreign science and technology, the Secretary
of State may utilize individuals and enter into contracts or
other arrangements to acquire needed expertise with any
agency or instrumentality of the United States, with any
State, territory, possession, or any political subdivision
thereof, or with any person, firm, association, corporation,
or educational institution, with or without reimbursement,
and without regard to section 3709 of the Revised Statutes
(41 U.S.C. 5) or section 3324 of title 31, United States
Code.

SEC. 3. FOREIGN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PANEL.

(a) Establishment.--The Secretary of State shall establish
a Foreign Science and Technology Assessment Panel.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of the Panel shall be to provide
advice on assessments performed by the Office of Foreign
Science and Technology Assessment, including review of
foreign science and technology assessment reports,
methodologies, subjects of study, and the means of improving
the quality and timeliness of the Office.
(c) Membership.--The Panel shall consist of 5 members who,
by reason of professional background and experience, are
specially qualified to provide advice on the activities of
science and technology in foreign countries as such
activities apply to the United States.
(d) Appointment.--The Secretary of State, in consultation
with the Director of the Office of Science and Technology
Policy in the Executive Office of the President, shall
appoint the panel members.
(e) Term.--A member shall be appointed to the Panel for a
term of 3 years.
(f) Authority to Accept Services.--Notwithstanding section
1342 of title 31, United States Code, the Secretary of State
may accept and employ voluntary and uncompensated services
(except for reimbursement of travel expenses) for the
purposes of the Panel. An individual providing such a
voluntary and uncompensated service may not be considered a
Federal employee, except for purposes of chapter 81 of title
5, United States Code, with respect to job-incurred
disability and title 28, United States Code, with respect to
tort claims.

SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be
necessary to carry out this Act.
______

By Ms. STABENOW (for herself and Mr. Levin):

[[Page S6314]]

S. 1212. A bill to require the Commandant of the Coast Guard to
convey the Coast Guard Cutter Mackinaw, upon its scheduled
decommissioning, to the City and County of Cheboygan, Michigan, to use
for purposes of a museum; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
that will convey the United States Coast Guard Cutter Mackinaw to the
City and County of Cheboygan for use as a museum.
The United States Coast Guard Cutter Mackinaw, or the ``Big Mac'' as
she is affectionately called, was commissioned on December 20, 1944.
Congress commissioned her construction during World War II to keep the
shipping lanes open during winter months to maintain the production of
steel. The Mackinaw has provided 60 years of outstanding service to the
communities and commercial enterprises of the Great Lakes.
The Mackinaw was a state of the art ice breaker ideally suited for
the Great Lakes because of her shallower draft, wider beam, and longer
length than the polar ice breakers that her design was based on. These
attributes enable the Mackinaw to break a 70 foot wide channel through
4 feet of solid blue ice to accommodate the largest of the Great Lakes
ore carriers. She has also plowed through a remarkable 37 feet of
broken ice.
The Mackinaw breaks ice for 12 of the 42 weeks of the Great Lakes
shipping season. Typically, the Mackinaw begins her ice breaking season
in the first week of March in the Straights of Mackinac and works her
way up through the Soo Locks, to Whitefish Bay and areas of the St.
Mary's River before heading to Lake Superior. During her lifetime, the
Mackinaw has enabled the shipping season to start sooner and last
longer to enable the annual delivery of 15 tons of iron ore and other
materials. Later in the year the Mackinaw works in the lower Lakes'
areas where she serves as a buoy tender, carries fuel and supplies to
light stations, serves as a training ship, and assists vessels in
distress when necessary.
The Mackinaw has been stationed in Cheboygan since she began
operations in the end of December 1944. She will serve through the
winter of 2005 and 2006 and then be decommissioned by the Coast Guard.
The Mackinaw will be a great local attraction, encourage tourism, build
jobs and aid the local economy.
The City of Cheboygan and the surrounding community are committed to
transforming this historic landmark into a museum after she has been
decommissioned. I am hopeful that she will be maintained for the public
for years to come. While her age has made her expensive to maintain,
the Mackinaw can still teach our children and visitors of Michigan's
Great Lakes heritage.
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. 1212

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CONVEYANCE OF DECOMMISSIONED COAST GUARD CUTTER
MACKINAW.

(a) In General.--Upon the scheduled decommissioning of the
Coast Guard Cutter MACKINAW, the Commandant of the Coast
Guard shall convey all right, title, and interest of the
United States in and to that vessel to the City and County of
Cheboygan, Michigan, without consideration, if--
(1) the recipient agrees--
(A) to use the vessel for purposes of a museum;
(B) not to use the vessel for commercial transportation
purposes;
(C) to make the vessel available to the United States
Government if needed for use by the Commandant in time of war
or a national emergency; and
(D) to hold the Government harmless for any claims arising
from exposure to hazardous materials, including asbestos and
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), after conveyance of the
vessel, except for claims arising from the use by the
Government under subparagraph (C);
(2) the recipient has funds available that will be
committed to operate and maintain the vessel conveyed in good
working condition, in the form of cash, liquid assets, or a
written loan commitment, and in an amount of at least
$700,000; and
(3) the recipient agrees to any other conditions the
Commandant considers appropriate.
(b) Maintenance and Delivery of Vessel.--Prior to
conveyance of the vessel under this section, the Commandant
shall, to the extent practical, and subject to other Coast
Guard mission requirements, make every effort to maintain the
integrity of the vessel and its equipment until the time of
delivery. If a conveyance is made under this section, the
Commandant shall deliver the vessel at the place where the
vessel is located, in its present condition, and without cost
to the Government. The conveyance of the vessel under this
section shall not be considered a distribution in commerce
for purposes of section 6(e) of Public Law 94-469 (15 U.S.C.
2605(e)).
(c) Other Excess Equipment.--The Commandant may convey to
the recipient any excess equipment or parts from other
decommissioned Coast Guard vessels for use to enhance the
vessel's operability and function for purposes of a museum.
______

By Ms. STABENOW (for herself and Mr. Smith):
S. 1213. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow a
refundable credit against income tax for the purchase of a principal
residence by a first-time homebuyer; to the Committee on Finance.
Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I believe ``home'' is one of the warmest
words in the English language. At the end of a long day, I think the
favorite phrase of every hardworking man and woman in this country is:
``Well, I'll see you tomorrow. I'm going home now.''
And, that is why I rise today to introduce the First Time Homebuyers'
Tax Credit Act of 2005.
The bill I am introducing will spread that warmth by opening the door
to homeownership to millions of hardworking families, helping them
cover the initial down payment and closing costs.
This initiative is in keeping with our longstanding national policy
of encouraging homeownership.
Owning a home has always been a fundamental part of the American
dream.
We, in Congress, have long recognized the social and economic value
in high rates of homeownership through laws that we have enacted, such
as the mortgage interest tax deduction and the capital gains exclusion
on the sale of a home.
Over the life of a loan, the mortgage interest tax deduction can save
homeowners thousands of dollars that they could use for other necessary
family expenses such as education or health care.
These benefits, however, are only available to individuals who own
their own home.
It is important also to note that owning a home is a principle and
reliable source of savings as homeowners build equity over the years
and their homes appreciate.
For many people, it is home equity--not stocks--that help them
through the retirement years.
In addition, owning a home insulates people from spikes in housing
costs.
Indeed, while rents may go up, the costs of a fixed monthly mortgage
payment, in relative terms, will go down over the course of the
mortgage.
Clearly, one of the biggest barriers to homeownership for working
families is the cost of a down payment and the costs associated with
closing a mortgage.
According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, typical closing costs
on an average sized loan of $200,000 can approach approximately $6,000.
Even with mortgage products that allow a down payment of 3 percent of
the value of a home, total costs can quickly approach $9,000.
This is an impossible amount to save for those who are working hard
to make ends meet. The problem is only getting worse as home values
climb faster than families can save for a down payment.
To address this problem, I am introducing the First Time Homebuyers'
Tax Credit Act of 2005.
My bill authorizes a one-time tax credit of up to $3,000 for
individuals and $6,000 for married couples.
This credit is similar to the existing mortgage interest tax
deduction in that it creates incentives for people to buy a home.
To be eligible for the credit, taxpayers must be first-time
homebuyers who were within the 25 percent bracket or lower in the year
before they purchase their home. That is $71,950 for single filers,
$102,800 for heads of household, and $119,950 for joint returns. There
is a dollar-for-dollar phase-out beyond the cap.

[[Page S6315]]

Normally, tax credits like this are an after-the-fact benefit. They
do little to get people actually into a home.
What is particularly innovative and beneficial about the tax credit
in this bill, however, is that, for the first time, the taxpayer can
either claim the credit in the year after he or she buys a first home
or the taxpayer can transfer the credit directly to a lender at
closing.
The transferred credit would go toward helping with the down payment
or closing costs. This is cash at the table.
As mandated in the bill, the eligible homebuyer would have the money
for the lender from the Treasury within 30 days of application.
I am happy to say that this legislation has had strong support. When
this bill was first introduced in 2003 it garnered the support of: The
American Bankers Association, America's Community Bankers, the Housing
Partnership Network, the National Housing Conference, the National
Congress for Community Economic Development, the National Council of La
Raza, the National Association of Affordable Housing Lenders, the
Manufactured Housing Institute, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, National
Community Reinvestment Coalition, Standard Federal Bank, Habitat for
Humanity, and, the National American Indian Housing Council.
Clearly, the breadth and diversity of support is strong for this
legislation.
This is a bold and aggressive effort to reach out to a large number
of working families to help them get into this first home.
The Joint Committee on Taxation has estimated that more than fifteen
million working people would get into their first home over the next
seven years because of this new tax credit.
We are working to send a message to people all over the country that
if you are working hard to save up enough to get into that first home,
the Federal government will make a strategic investment in your
family--it will offer a hand up.
This is not unlike what we already do through the mortgage interest
tax deduction for millions of people who are fortunate enough to
already own their own home.
We certainly won't do all the hard work for you. You must be frugal
and save and do most of the work yourself, but we, in Congress,
understand that it is good for America to enhance homeownership.
We also understand that this sort of investment in working families
stimulates the economy.
No one can deny that when the First Time Homebuyers' Tax Credit is
enacted and used by millions of people, every single time the credit is
used, it will be stimulative. Why?
Because it means someone bought a house. And that generates economic
activity for multiple small business people. House appraisers and
Inspectors. Realtors. Lenders. Title insurers. And so on. And there is
a ripple of economic activity by the new homeowners as they fix up
their new homes and get settled in.
Housing has been such a bright light in the sluggish economy we've
faced for the last several years. My bill is designed to ensure that
the housing sector remains a strong component of our economy.
Finally, let me close by emphasizing how happy and proud I am that
this tax legislation is bipartisan. In a closely divided Senate, and a
closely divided Congress, it is so important to work across the aisle
and Senator Smith, who is a real champion for good housing policy, is
someone I want to work closely with on this bill and other important
housing legislation. He understands how housing tax benefits help build
strong communities and provide economic security for millions of
families.
I am committed to seeing this legislation passed. And, I welcome the
chance to work with all of my colleagues to see the dream of
homeownership expanded to all people.
Home. Sentimentally, it is one of the warmest words in the English
language. Economically, it's the key word in bringing millions of
families in from the cold and letting them begin building wealth for
themselves and their family.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation be printed
in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1213

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 ``First-Time Homebuyers' Tax
Credit Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. REFUNDABLE CREDIT FOR FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYERS.

(a) In General.--Subpart C of part IV of subchapter A of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
refundable credits) is amended by redesignating section 36 as
section 37 and by inserting after section 35 the following
new section:

``SEC. 36. PURCHASE OF PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE BY FIRST-TIME
HOMEBUYER.

``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an individual
who is a first-time homebuyer of a principal residence in the
United States during any taxable year, there shall be allowed
as a credit against the tax imposed by this subtitle for the
taxable year an amount equal to 10 percent of the purchase
price of the residence.
``(b) Limitations.--
``(1) Maximum dollar amount.--
``(A) In general.--The credit allowed under subsection (a)
shall not exceed the excess (if any) of--
``(i) $3,000 (2 times such amount in the case of a joint
return), over
``(ii) the credit transfer amount determined under
subsection (c) with respect to the purchase to which
subsection (a) applies.
``(B) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any taxable
year beginning after December 31, 2005, the $3,000 amount
under subparagraph (A) shall be increased by an amount equal
to $3,000, multiplied by the cost-of-living adjustment
determined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year in
which the taxable year begins by substituting `2004' for
`1992' in subparagraph (B) thereof. If the $3,000 amount as
adjusted under the preceding sentence is not a multiple of
$10, such amount shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of
$10.
``(2) Taxable income limitation.--
``(A) In general.--If the taxable income of the taxpayer
for any taxable year exceeds the maximum taxable income in
the table under subsection (a), (b), (c), or (d) of section
1, whichever is applicable, to which the 25 percent rate
applies, the dollar amounts in effect under paragraph
(1)(A)(i) for such taxpayer for the following taxable year
shall be reduced (but not below zero) by the amount of the
excess.
``(B) Change in return status.--In the case of married
individuals filing a joint return for any taxable year who
did not file such a joint return for the preceding taxable
year, subparagraph (A) shall be applied by reference to the
highest taxable income of either such individual for the
preceding taxable year.
``(c) Transfer of Credit.--
``(1) In general.--A taxpayer may transfer all or a portion
of the credit allowable under subsection (a) to 1 or more
persons as payment of any liability of the taxpayer arising
out of--
``(A) the downpayment of any portion of the purchase price
of the principal residence, and
``(B) closing costs in connection with the purchase
(including any points or other fees incurred in financing the
purchase).
``(2) Credit transfer mechanism.--
``(A) In general.--Not less than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this section, the Secretary shall establish
and implement a credit transfer mechanism for purposes of
paragraph (1). Such mechanism shall require the Secretary
to--
``(i) certify that the taxpayer is eligible to receive the
credit provided by this section with respect to the purchase
of a principal residence and that the transferee is eligible
to receive the credit transfer,
``(ii) certify that the taxpayer has not received the
credit provided by this section with respect to the purchase
of any other principal residence,
``(iii) certify the credit transfer amount which will be
paid to the transferee, and
``(iv) require any transferee that directly receives the
credit transfer amount from the Secretary to notify the
taxpayer within 14 days of the receipt of such amount.
Any check, certificate, or voucher issued by the Secretary
pursuant to this paragraph shall include the taxpayer
identification number of the taxpayer and the address of the
principal residence being purchased.
``(B) Timely receipt.--The Secretary shall issue the credit
transfer amount not less than 30 days after the date of the
receipt of an application for a credit transfer.
``(3) Payment of interest.--
``(A) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this title, the Secretary shall pay interest on any amount
which is not paid to a person during the 30-day period
described in paragraph (2)(B).
``(B) Amount of interest.--Interest under subparagraph (A)
shall be allowed and paid--
``(i) from the day after the 30-day period described in
paragraph (2)(B) to the date payment is made, and
``(ii) at the overpayment rate established under section
6621.

[[Page S6316]]

``(C) Exception.--This paragraph shall not apply to
failures to make payments as a result of any natural disaster
or other circumstance beyond the control of the Secretary.
``(4) Effect on legal rights and obligations.--Nothing in
this subsection shall be construed to--
``(A) require a lender to complete a loan transaction
before the credit transfer amount has been transferred to the
lender, or
``(B) prevent a lender from altering the terms of a loan
(including the rate, points, fees, and other costs) due to
changes in market conditions or other factors during the
period of time between the application by the taxpayer for a
credit transfer and the receipt by the lender of the credit
transfer amount.
``(d) Definitions and Special Rules.--For purposes of this
section--
``(1) First-time homebuyer.--
``(A) In general.--The term `first-time homebuyer' has the
same meaning as when used in section 72(t)(8)(D)(i).
``(B) One-time only.--If an individual is treated as a
first-time homebuyer with respect to any principal residence,
such individual may not be treated as a first-time homebuyer
with respect to any other principal residence.
``(C) Married individuals filing jointly.--In the case of
married individuals who file a joint return, the credit under
this section is allowable only if both individuals are first-
time homebuyers.
``(D) Other taxpayers.--If 2 or more individuals who are
not married purchase a principal residence--
``(i) the credit under this section is allowable only if
each of the individuals is a first-time homebuyer, and
``(ii) the amount of the credit allowed under subsection
(a) shall be allocated among such individuals in such manner
as the Secretary may prescribe, except that the total amount
of the credits allowed to all such individuals shall not
exceed the amount in effect under subsection (b)(1)(A) for
individuals filing joint returns.
``(2) Principal residence.--The term `principal residence'
has the same meaning as when used in section 121. Except as
provided in regulations, an interest in a partnership, S
corporation, or trust which owns an interest in a residence
shall not be treated as an interest in a residence for
purposes of this paragraph.
``(3) Purchase.--
``(A) In general.--The term `purchase' means any
acquisition, but only if--
``(i) the property is not acquired from a person whose
relationship to the person acquiring it would result in the
disallowance of losses under section 267 or 707(b) (but, in
applying section 267 (b) and (c) for purposes of this
section, paragraph (4) of section 267(c) shall be treated as
providing that the family of an individual shall include only
the individual's spouse, ancestors, and lineal descendants),
and
``(ii) the basis of the property in the hands of the person
acquiring it is not determined--

``(I) in whole or in part by reference to the adjusted
basis of such property in the hands of the person from whom
acquired, or
``(II) under section 1014(a) (relating to property acquired
from a decedent).

``(B) Construction.--A residence which is constructed by
the taxpayer shall be treated as purchased by the taxpayer.
``(4) Purchase price.--The term `purchase price' means the
adjusted basis of the principal residence on the date of
acquisition (within the meaning of section 72(t)(8)(D)(iii)).
``(e) Denial of Double Benefit.--No credit shall be allowed
under subsection (a) for any expense for which a deduction or
credit is allowed under any other provision of this chapter.
``(f) Basis Adjustment.--For purposes of this subtitle, if
a credit is allowed under this section with respect to the
purchase of any residence, the basis of such residence shall
be reduced by the amount of the credit so allowed.
``(g) Property to Which Section Applies.--
``(1) In general.--The provisions of this section apply to
a principal residence if--
``(A) the taxpayer purchases the residence on or after
January 1, 2005, and before January 1, 2010, or
``(B) the taxpayer enters into, on or after January 1,
2005, and before January 1, 2010, a binding contract to
purchase the residence, and purchases and occupies the
residence before July 1, 2011.''.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Subsection (a) of section 1016 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 (relating to general rule for adjustments to
basis) 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) in the case of a residence with respect to which a
credit was allowed under section 36, to the extent provided
in section 36(f).''.
(2) Section 1324(b)(2) of title 31, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``or'' before ``enacted'' and by
inserting before the period at the end ``, or from section 36
of such Code''.
(c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart
C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking the item relating
to section 36 and inserting the following new items:

``Sec. 36. Purchase of principal residence by first-time homebuyer.
``Sec. 37. Overpayments of tax.''.

(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2004.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, today I introduce important legislation to
enable more Americans to realize the dream of homeownership. The First-
Time Homebuyers' Tax Credit Act that Senator Stabenow and I are
introducing would give a one-time tax credit that will help more
Americans to become homeowners.
Homeownership brings safety and stability to families and their
communities. People who own their homes have the security of knowing
that they have a reliable investment, and they are protected from
spikes in housing costs. Yet despite these advantages, barriers exist
for many who are looking to make the leap to homeownership.
Even for families and individuals who can make monthly mortgage
payments, down payment and closing costs can prove too great a burden.
Based on information from the Mortgage Bankers Association, the average
loan of $175,000 would incur closing costs of approximately $4,000.
Combined with even a modest down-payment of as little as 3 percent of a
home's value, total costs can quickly approach $9,000 or more.
To help Americans achieve the dream of private homeownership, the
First-Time Homebuyer Bill would provide a tax credit of up to $3,000 to
individuals and up to $6,000 for families falling within or below the
27 percent tax bracket.
The bill would allow first-time homebuyers to claim the credit on
their tax return or transfer the credit directly to the lender at
closing, providing an immediate benefit to potential homeowners. This
credit is similar to the Washington DC Homebuyers' Tax Credit.
While Congress has enacted legislation to increase incentives for
homeownership in the past, including the mortgage interest tax
deduction, these benefits are available only to those who already own a
home. In contrast, the First Time Homebuyer Bill will help increase
homeownership among those who are working towards their first home
purchase.
I thank you for the opportunity to speak today, and I urge my
colleagues to support this important legislation.
______

By Ms. SNOWE (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr. Warner, Mr. Leahy, Mr.
Chafee, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Durbin, Ms.
Cantwell, and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 1214. A bill to require equitable coverage of prescription
contraceptive drugs and devices, and contraceptive services under
health plans; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, this year well over 6 million pregnancies
will occur in America. The challenge of raising healthy children and
preparing them for a changing world is a staggering one indeed. This is
even more so when so frequently both parents are working. So it is
tragic that half of all pregnancies today are unplanned. In too many
cases, this means that the necessary financial, emotional and other
resources for parenting are simply not present. I think we certainly
share a broad consensus that every child should be wanted, and that
parents should have the resources to ensure their child's health and
success.
This week we have commemorated the 40th anniversary of a landmark
Supreme Court decision, that of Griswold v. Connecticut, in which the
right of married couples to contraceptives and family planning
counseling was recognized. Yet less than a decade ago, when we examined
the state of contraceptive coverage by insurance plans, it certainly
was discouraging. While many health plans included coverage for
prescription drugs, nearly half did not cover even oral contraceptives.
Needless to say, many other contraceptive options for women, such as
the diaphragm, implants, and injectable methods were covered even less
frequently. This is disturbing, as contraception is so vital to a
woman's health. Most women will spend just a few years attempting to
conceive, with the average woman desiring two children. That

[[Page S6317]]

leaves about 30 years in which women need access to safe, affordable
contraceptives.
The benefits of contraception should be obvious. The maternal death
rate in the U.S. is only one third what it was back in 1965 before
Griswold. The same is true for infant survival. Family planning
preserves a woman's health, and allows couples to ensure that they have
the means to give every child the attention, support, and resources
they need.
So today I am joining again with Senator Reid to introduce
legislation to ensure broader access to contraception--to ensure that
the promise of Griswold v. Connecticut is fully realized. I thank him
for his ongoing leadership on this issue. We both agree that
contraception coverage is essential to reducing unwanted pregnancies
and to ensuring that every couple can employ family planning. The
Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act, which
we again introduce today, will assure that for those plans which
provide prescription drug coverage, contraceptive coverage is not
excluded. It further ensures that contraceptive services are provided
equitably with other outpatient services.
Such coverage is just what the Institute of Medicine called for back
in 1995, when the Institute reported that a lack of coverage was a
major contributor to unwanted pregnancy. Expanding the proportion of
health plans which cover contraception is one of the Surgeon General's
objectives for the Healthy People 2010 plan. We can certainly achieve
that objective and ensure that in 2010, unwanted pregnancies are
exceedingly rare.
Some may argue that such a mandate creates yet more costs for
providers, but the evidence fails to support that notion. We have seen
that for every dollar in public funds which is invested in family
planning, three dollars is saved in Medicaid costs for pregnancy-
related health care and medical care for newborns. Indeed after we
acted in 1998 to assure coverage to women in the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Program, the Office of Personnel Management concluded
in 2001 that there was no cost increase due to coverage.
Many health providers have come to the same conclusion. I note that
approximately 90 percent of plans now cover the leading methods of
reversible contraception. So we have come a long way.
There should be no mistake--this issue boils down the principles of
basic fairness--fairness for half this Nation's population, fairness in
how we view and treat a woman's reproductive health versus every other
kind of health care need that can be addressed with prescription drugs.
The facts are not in dispute B the lack of equitable coverage of
prescription contraceptives has a very real impact on the lives of
America's women and, therefore, our society as a whole. This is not
overstatement, this is reality.
All we are saying is that if an employer provides insurance coverage
for all other prescription drugs, they must also provide coverage for
FDA-approved prescription contraceptives--it is that simple, it is that
fair, and it builds on existing law and jurisprudence.
The approach we are taking today has already been endorsed by a total
of 29 States--including my home State of Maine--that have passed
similar laws since 1998. This is real progress but this piecemeal
approach to fairness leaves many American women at the mercy of
geography when it comes to the coverage they deserve.
But fairness is not the only issue. We believe that EPICC not only
makes sense in terms of the cost of contraceptives for women, but also
as a means bridging the pro-choice pro-life chasm by helping prevent
unintended pregnancies and thereby also preventing abortions. The fact
of the matter is, we know that there are over three million unintended
pregnancies every year in the United States. We also know that almost
half of those pregnancies result from women who do not use
contraceptives. Most of the other half involved inconsistent or
incorrect use of contraceptives--and in many of these cases, the women
would benefit from counseling or provision of a contraceptive which is
more appropriate to their circumstances.
Surveys consistently demonstrate that almost nine out of ten
Americans support contraception access and over 75 percent support laws
requiring health insurance plans to cover methods of contraception such
as birth control pills.
The question before us is, if EPICC-style coverage is good enough for
9 million Federal employees and their dependents, if it is good enough
for every Member of Congress and every Senator, why is not it good
enough for the American people?
Women should have control over their reproductive health. It is the
best interests of their overall health, their children and their future
children's health--and when we have fewer unintended pregnancies, we
will reduce the number of abortions. We need to finally fix this
inequity in prescription drug coverage and make certain that all
American women have access to this most basic health need. I thank all
of those who have supported us in this effort, and call upon each of my
colleagues to join us to ensure that more couples have access to family
planning to reduce unwanted pregnancies, and to assure the health and
security of American families.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, this week marks the fortieth anniversary of
the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Griswold v. Connecticut that struck
down a Connecticut law that had made the use of birth control by
married couples illegal. This decision laid the groundwork for
widespread access to birth control for all American women.
In the 40 years since this landmark decision, increased access to
birth control has contributed to a dramatic improvement in maternal and
infant health and has drastically reduced the infant death rate in our
country.
In spite of these advances, we still have a long way to go. The
United States has among the highest rates of unintended pregnancies of
all industrialized nations. Half of all pregnancies in the United
States are unintended, and nearly half of those end in abortion.
Making contraception more accessible and affordable is one crucial
step toward reducing unintended pregnancies, reducing abortions and
improving women's health.
We cannot allow the pendulum to swing backwards. That is why Senator
Snowe and I are reintroducing the Equity in Prescription and
Contraception Coverage Act of 2005, EPICC. Over the last 8 years,
Senator Snowe and I have joined together to advance this important
legislation.
The EPICC legislation is also a critical component of the Prevention
First Act, S. 20. This legislation includes a number of provisions that
will improve women's health, reduce the rate of unintended pregnancy
and reduce abortions.
The legislation we are introducing today proves we can find not only
common ground, but also a commonsense solution to these important
challenges.
By making sure women can afford their prescription contraceptives,
our bill will help to reduce the staggering rates of unintended
pregnancy in the United States, and reduce abortions.
It is a national tragedy that half of all pregnancies nationwide are
unintended, and that half of those will end in abortions. It is a
tragedy, but it doesn't have to be. If we work together, we can prevent
these unintended pregnancies and abortions.
One of the most important steps we can take to prevent unintended
pregnancies, and to reduce abortions, is to make sure American women
have access to affordable, effective contraception.
There are a number of safe and effective contraceptives available by
prescription. Used properly, they greatly reduce the rate of unintended
pregnancies.
However, many women simply can't afford these prescriptions, and
their insurance doesn't pay for them, even though it covers other
prescriptions.
This is not fair. We know women on average earn less than men, yet
they must pay far more than men for health-related expenses.
According to the Women's Research and Education Institute, women of
reproductive age pay 68 percent more in out-of-pocket medical expenses
than men, largely due to their reproductive health-care needs.
Because many women can't afford the prescription contraceptives they
would like to use, many do without

[[Page S6318]]

them, and the result, all too often, is unintended pregnancy and
abortion.
This isn't an isolated problem. The fact is, a majority of women in
this country are covered by health insurance plans that do not provide
coverage for prescription contraceptives
This is unfair to women. It is bad policy that causes additional
unintended pregnancies, and adversely affects women's health.
Senator Snowe and I first introduced our legislation in 1997. Since
then, the Viagra pill went on the market, and one month later it was
covered by most insurance policies.
Birth control pills have been on the market since 1960, and today, 45
years later, they are covered by only one-third of health insurance
policies.
So, today we find ourselves in the inexplicable situation where most
insurance policies pay for Viagra, but not for prescription
contraceptives that prevent unintentional pregnancies and abortions.
This isn't fair, and it isn't even cost-effective, because most
insurance policies do cover sterilization and abortion procedures. In
other words, they won't pay for the pills that could prevent an
abortion, but they will pay for the procedure itself, which is much
more costly.
The Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, which has provided
contraceptive coverage for several years, shows that adding such
coverage does not make the plan more expensive.
In December 2000, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
EEOC ruled that an employer's failure to include insurance coverage for
prescription contraceptives, when other prescription drugs and devices
are covered, constitutes unlawful sex discrimination under Title VII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
On June 12, 2001, a Federal district court in Seattle made the same
finding in the case of Erickson vs. Bartell Drug Company.
These decisions confirm what we have known all along: contraceptive
coverage is a matter of equity and fairness for women.
We are not asking for special treatment of contraceptives, only
equitable treatment within the context of an existing prescription drug
benefit.
This legislation is right because it is fair to women.
It is right because it is more cost-effective than other services,
including abortions, sterilizations and tubal ligations, costly
procedures that most insurance companies routinely cover.
And it is right because it will prevent unintended pregnancies and
reduce abortions, goals we all share.
This is common sense, common-ground legislation, and it is long
overdue.
______

By Mr. GREGG (for himself, Ms, Mikulski, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Biden,
Mr. Corzine, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Reed, Ms. Cantwell, Mrs. Murray,
Mr. Cochran, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Inouye, and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 1215. A bill to authorize the acquisition of interests in
underdeveloped coastal areas in order better to ensure their protection
from development; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, I rise today along with Senator Mikulski to
introduce the Coastal and Estuarine Land Protection Act. We are
introducing this much needed coastal protection act along with Senators
Sarbanes, Biden, Corzine, Snowe, Reed, Cantwell, Murray, Cochran,
Kerry, Wyden, and Inouye. In addition, this legislation is supported by
the Trust for Public Land, Coastal States Organization, International
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, Association of National
Estuary Programs, the Land Trust Alliance, Society for the Protection
of New Hampshire Forests, The Conservation Fund, NH Audubon, Restore
America's Estuaries, and National Estuarine Research Reserve
Association.
The Coastal and Estuarine Land Protection Act promotes coordinated
land acquisition and protection efforts in coastal and estuarine areas
by fostering partnerships between nongovernmental organizations and
Federal, State, and local governments. As clearly outlined by the U.S.
Commission of Ocean Policy, these efforts are urgently needed. With
Americans rapidly moving to the coast, pressures to develop critical
coastal ecosystems are increasing. There are fewer and fewer
undeveloped and pristine areas left in the Nation's coastal and
estuarine watersheds. These areas provide important nursery habitat for
two-thirds of the Nation's commercial fish and shellfish, provide
nesting and foraging habitat for coastal birds, harbor significant
natural plant communities, and serve to facilitate coastal flood
control and pollutant filtration.
The Coastal and Estuarine Land Protection Act pairs willing sellers
through community-based initiatives with sources of Federal funds to
enhance environmental protection. Lands can be acquired in full or
through easements, and none of the lands purchased through this program
would be held by the Federal Government. This bill puts land
conservation initiatives in the hands of State and local communities.
This new program, authorized through the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration at $60,000,000 per year, would provide
Federal matching funds to States with approved coastal management
programs or to National Estuarine Research Reserves through a
competitive grant process. Federal matching funds may not exceed 75
percent of the cost of a project under this program, and non-Federal
sources may count in-kind support toward their portion of the cost
share.
This coastal land protection program provides much need support for
local coastal conservation initiatives throughout the country. For
instance, I have worked hard to secure significant funds for the Great
Bay estuary in New Hampshire. This estuary is the jewel of the seacoast
region, and is home to a wide variety of plants and animal species that
are particularly threatened by encroaching development and
environmental pollutants. By working with local communities to purchase
lands or easements on these valuable parcels of land, New Hampshire has
been able to successfully conserve the natural and scenic heritage of
this vital estuary.
Programs such as the Coastal and Estuarine Land Protection program
will further enable other States to participate in these community-
based conservation efforts in coastal areas. This program was modeled
after the U.S. Department of Agriculture's successful Forest Legacy
Program, which has conserved millions of acres of productive and
ecologically significant forest land around the county.
I welcome the opportunity to offer this important legislation, with
my good friend from Maryland, Senator Mikulski. I am thankful for her
leadership on this issue, and look forward to working with her to make
the vision for this legislation a reality, and to successfully conserve
our coastal lands for their ecological, historical, recreational, and
aesthetic values.
______

By Mr. CORZINE:
S. 1216. A bill to require financial institutions and financial
service providers to notify customers of the unauthorized use of
personal financial information, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, identity theft is a serious and growing
concern facing our Nation's consumers. According to the Federal Trade
Commission, nearly 10 million Americans were the victims of identity
theft in 2003, three times the number of victims just 3 years earlier.
Research shows that there are more than 13 identity thefts every
minute.
According to the Identity Theft Resource Center, identity theft
victims spend on average nearly 600 hours recovering from the crime.
Additional research indicates the costs of lost wages and income as a
result of the crime can soar as high as $16,000 per incident. No one
wants to suffer this kind of hardship.
Events this week have further served to highlight how serious the
problem has become. The announcement by Citigroup that a box of
computer tapes containing information on 3.9 million customers was lost
by United Parcel Service in my own State of New Jersey while in transit
to a credit reporting agency is the latest in a line of recent, high
profile incidents. In fact, I myself was a victim of a similar recent
loss of computer tapes by Bank of America.
In both of these cases, Citigroup and Bank of America acted
responsibly and

[[Page S6319]]

notified possible victims in a prompt and timely manner. But this is
not always the case.
At the very least, consumers deserve to be made aware when their
personal information has been compromised. Right now, they must hope
that the laws of a few individual States, such as California, apply to
their case, or that victimized institutions will act responsibly on
their own.
The legislation I am introducing today, the Financial Privacy Breach
Notification Act of 2005, would protect consumers by requiring prompt
notification by any financial institution or affiliated data broker in
all cases, subject, of course, to the concerns of law enforcement
agencies. It would also require automatic inclusion of fraud alerts in
victim's credit files to minimize the damage done.
Notification by itself won't solve everything, but it is an important
first step that requires immediate attention. I intend to introduce
more comprehensive legislation in the very near future to further
protect consumers against the growing threat of identity theft, but
requiring notification in a uniform fashion is an important and
urgently needed first step.
It is imperative that we take action to combat the growing threat of
identity theft. This crime harms individuals and families, and drags
down our economy in the form of lost productivity and capital. We can
do more and we must do more.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1216

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 ``Financial Privacy Breach
Notification Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. TIMELY NOTIFICATION OF UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS TO
PERSONAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION.

Subtitle B of title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (15
U.S.C. 6821 et seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating sections 526 and 527 as sections 528
and 529, respectively; and
(2) by inserting after section 525 the following:

``SEC. 526. NOTIFICATION TO CUSTOMERS OF UNAUTHORIZED ACCESS
TO PERSONAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION.

``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) Breach.--The term `breach'--
``(A) means the unauthorized acquisition, or loss, of
computerized data or paper records which compromises the
security, confidentiality, or integrity of personal financial
information maintained by or on behalf of a financial
institution; and
``(B) does not include a good faith acquisition of personal
financial information by an employee or agent of a financial
institution for a business purpose of the institution, if the
personal financial information is not subject to further
unauthorized disclosure.
``(2) Personal financial information.--The term `personal
financial information' means the last name of an individual
in combination with any 1 or more of the following data
elements, when either the name or the data elements are not
encrypted:
``(A) Social security number.
``(B) Driver's license number or State identification
number.
``(C) Account number, credit or debit card number, in
combination with any required security code, access code, or
password that would permit access to the financial account of
an individual.
``(b) Notification to Customers Relating to Unauthorized
Access of Personal Financial Information.--
``(1) Financial institution requirement.--In any case in
which there has been a breach of personal financial
information at a financial institution, or such a breach is
reasonably believed to have occurred, the financial
institution shall promptly notify--
``(A) each customer affected by the violation or suspected
violation;
``(B) each consumer reporting agency described in section
603(p) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a);
and
``(C) appropriate law enforcement agencies, in any case in
which the financial institution has reason to believe that
the breach or suspected breach affects a large number of
customers, including as described in subsection (e)(1)(C),
subject to regulations of the Federal Trade Commission.
``(2) Other entities.--For purposes of paragraph (1), any
person that maintains personal financial information for or
on behalf of a financial institution shall promptly notify
the financial institution of any case in which such customer
information has been, or is reasonably believed to have been,
breached.
``(c) Timeliness of Notification.--Notification required by
this section shall be made--
``(1) promptly and without unreasonable delay, upon
discovery of the breach or suspected breach; and
``(2) consistent with--
``(A) the legitimate needs of law enforcement, as provided
in subsection (d); and
``(B) any measures necessary to determine the scope of the
breach or restore the reasonable integrity of the information
security system of the financial institution.
``(d) Delays for Law Enforcement Purposes.--Notification
required by this section may be delayed if a law enforcement
agency determines that the notification would impede a
criminal investigation, and in any such case, notification
shall be made promptly after the law enforcement agency
determines that it would not compromise the investigation.
``(e) Form of Notice.--Notification required by this
section may be provided--
``(1) to a customer--
``(A) in written notification;
``(B) in electronic form, if the notice provided is
consistent with the provisions regarding electronic records
and signatures set forth in section 101 of the Electronic
Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (15 U.S.C.
7001);
``(C) if the Federal Trade Commission determines that the
number of all customers affected by, or the cost of providing
notifications relating to, a single breach or suspected
breach would make other forms of notification prohibitive, or
in any case in which the financial institution certifies in
writing to the Federal Trade Commission that it does not have
sufficient customer contact information to comply with other
forms of notification, in the form of--
``(i) an e-mail notice, if the financial institution has
access to an e-mail address for the affected customer that it
has reason to believe is accurate;
``(ii) a conspicuous posting on the Internet website of the
financial institution, if the financial institution maintains
such a website; or
``(iii) notification through the media that a breach of
personal financial information has occurred or is suspected
that compromises the security, confidentiality, or integrity
of customer information of the financial institution; or
``(D) in such other form as the Federal Trade Commission
may by rule prescribe; and
``(2) to consumer reporting agencies and law enforcement
agencies (where appropriate), in such form as the Federal
Trade Commission may prescribe, by rule.
``(f) Content of Notification.--Each notification to a
customer under subsection (b) shall include--
``(1) a statement that--
``(A) credit reporting agencies have been notified of the
relevant breach or suspected breach; and
``(B) the credit report and file of the customer will
contain a fraud alert to make creditors aware of the breach
or suspected breach, and to inform creditors that the express
authorization of the customer is required for any new
issuance or extension of credit (in accordance with section
605(g) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act); and
``(2) such other information as the Federal Trade
Commission determines is appropriate.
``(g) Compliance.--Notwithstanding subsection (e), a
financial institution shall be deemed to be in compliance
with this section, if--
``(1) the financial institution has established a
comprehensive information security program that is consistent
with the standards prescribed by the appropriate regulatory
body under section 501(b);
``(2) the financial institution notifies affected customers
and consumer reporting agencies in accordance with its own
internal information security policies in the event of a
breach or suspected breach of personal financial information;
and
``(3) such internal security policies incorporate
notification procedures that are consistent with the
requirements of this section and the rules of the Federal
Trade Commission under this section.
``(h) Civil Penalties.--
``(1) Damages.--Any customer injured by a violation of this
section may institute a civil action to recover damages
arising from that violation.
``(2) Injunctions.--Actions of a financial institution in
violation or potential violation of this section may be
enjoined.
``(3) Cumulative effect.--The rights and remedies available
under this section are in addition to any other rights and
remedies available under applicable law.
``(i) Rules of Construction.--
``(1) In general.--Compliance with this section by a
financial institution shall not be construed to be a
violation of any provision of subtitle (A), or any other
provision of Federal or State law prohibiting the disclosure
of financial information to third parties.
``(2) Limitation.--Except as specifically provided in this
section, nothing in this section requires or authorizes a
financial institution to disclose information that it is
otherwise prohibited from disclosing under subtitle A or any
other provision of Federal or State law.
``(j) Enforcement.--The Federal Trade Commission is
authorized to enforce compliance with this section, including
the assessment of fines for violations of subsection
(b)(1).''.

[[Page S6320]]

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

This Act shall take effect on the expiration of the date
which is 6 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
______

By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. DeWine, Mr. Corzine, Mr.
Durbin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Johnson, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. Lautenberg,
Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Kennedy, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Kerry, Ms.
Mikulski, Mr. Akaka, Mr. Salazar, and Mr. Sarbanes):
S. 1217. A bill to amend title II of the Social Security Act to phase
out the 24-month waiting period for disabled individuals to become
eligible for medicare benefits, to eliminate the waiting period for
individuals with life-threatening conditions, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce bipartisan
legislation entitled ``Ending the Medicare Disability Waiting Period
Act of 2005'' with Senators DeWine, Corzine, Durbin, Schumer, Johnson,
Cantwell, Lautenberg, Stabenow, Kennedy, Clinton, Kerry, Mikulski,
Akaka, Salazar, and Sarbanes. This legislation would phase-out the
current 2-year waiting period that people with disabilities must endure
after qualifying for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). In
the interim or as the waiting period is being phased out, the bill
would also create a process by which the Secretary can immediately
waive the waiting period for people with life-threatening illnesses.
When Medicare was expanded in 1972 to include people with significant
disabilities, lawmakers created the 24-month waiting period. According
to a July 2003 report from the Commonwealth Fund, it is estimated that
over 1.2 million SSDI beneficiaries are in the Medicare waiting period
at any given time, ``all of whom are unable to work because of their
disability and most of whom have serious health problems, low incomes,
and limited access to health insurance.''
The stated reason at the time was to limit the fiscal cost of the
provision. However, I would assert that there is no reason, be it
fiscal or moral, to tell people that they must wait longer than 2 years
after becoming severely disabled before we provide them access to much
needed health care.
In fact, it is important to note that there really are actually three
waiting periods that are imposed upon people seeking to qualify for
SSDI. First, there is the disability determination process through the
Social Security Administration, which often takes many months or even
longer than a year in some cases. Second, once a worker has been
certified as having a severe or permanent disability, they must wait an
additional 5 months before receiving their first SSDI check. And third,
after receiving that first SSDI check, there is the 2-year period that
people must wait before their Medicare coverage begins.
What happens to the health and well-being of people waiting more than
2\1/2\ years before they finally receive critically needed Medicare
coverage? According to Karen Davis, president of the Commonwealth Fund,
which has conducted 2 important studies on the issue, ``Individuals in
the waiting period for Medicare suffer from a broad range of
debilitating diseases and are in urgent need of appropriate medical
care to manage their conditions. Eliminating the 2-year wait would
ensure access to care for those already on the way to Medicare.''
Again, we are talking about individuals that have been determined to
be unable to engage in any ``substantial, gainful activity'' because of
either a physical or mental impairment that is expected to result in
death or to continue for at least 12 months. These are people that, by
definition, are in more need of health coverage than anybody else in
our society. Of the 1.2 million people stuck in the 2-year waiting
period at any given time, it is estimated that one-third, or 400,000,
are left completely uninsured. The consequences are unacceptable and
are, in fact, dire.
In fact, various studies show that death rates among SSDI recipients
are highest during the first 2 years of enrollment while waiting to be
covered by Medicare. For example, the Commonwealth Fund report,
entitled ``Elimination of Medicare's Waiting Period for Seriously
Disabled Adults: Impact on Coverage and Costs,'' 4 percent of these
people die during the waiting period. In other words, it is estimated
that of the estimated 400,000 uninsured disabled Americans in the
waiting period at any given time, 16,000 of them will die awaiting
Medicare coverage. Let me repeat . . . 16,000 of the 400,000 uninsured
disabled in the waiting period at any given moment will die while
waiting for Medicare coverage to begin.
Moreover, this does not factor in the serious health problems that
others experience while waiting for Medicare coverage during the 2-year
period. Although there is no direct data on the profile of SSDI
beneficiaries in the 2-year waiting period, the Commonwealth Fund has
undertaken a separate analysis of the Medicare Current Beneficiary
Survey for 1998 to get a good sense of the demographic characteristics,
income, and health conditions of this group.
According to the analysis, ``. . . 45 percent of nonelderly Medicare
beneficiaries with disabilities had incomes below the Federal poverty
line, and 77 percent had incomes below 200 percent of poverty. Fifth-
nine percent reported that they were in fair or poor health; of this
group, more than 90 percent reported that they suffered from one or
more chronic illnesses, including arthritis (52 percent), hypertension
(46 percent), mental disorder (36 percent), heart condition (35
percent), chronic lung disease (26 percent), cancer (20 percent),
diabetes (19 percent), and stroke (12 percent).''
To ascertain the impact the waiting period has on the lives of these
citizens, the Commonwealth Fund and the Christopher Reeve Paralysis
Foundation conducted a follow-up to ``gain insight into the experiences
of people with disabilities under age 65 in the Medicare 2-year waiting
period.'' According to that second report entitled ``Waiting for
Medicare: Experiences of Uninsured People with Disabilities in the Two-
Year Waiting Period for Medicare'' in October 2004, ``Most of these
individuals must invariably get by with some combination of living one
day at a time, assertiveness, faith, and sheer luck.''
One person in the waiting period with a spinal cord injury from
Atlanta, Georgia, seeking medical treatment for their condition was
told to simply ``try not to get sick for 2 years.'' As the individual
said in response, ``None of us TRIED to become disabled.''
The people that we have spoken to in the waiting period, since the
introduction of this legislation last year, talk about foregoing
critically needed medical treatment, stopping medications and therapy,
feeling dismayed and depressed about their lives and future, and
feeling a loss of control over their lives and independence while in
the waiting period.
These testimonials and appeals in support of this legislation are
often emotional and intense. Some describe the waiting period as a
``living nightmare'' and appropriately ask how it is possible that
their government is doing this to them.
In fact, some have had the unfortunate fate of having received SSI
and Medicaid coverage, applied for SSDI, and then lost their Medicaid
coverage because they were not aware that the change in income, when
they received SSDI, would push them over the financial limits for
Medicaid. In such a case, and let me emphasize this point, the
government is effectively taking their health care coverage away
because they are so severely disabled.
Therefore, for some in the waiting period, their battle is often as
much with the government as it is with their medical condition,
disease, or disability.
Nobody could possible think this makes any sense.
House Ways and Means Chairman Bill Thomas questioned the rationale of
the waiting period in a press conference on April 29, 2005.
As the Medicare Rights Center has said, ``By forcing Americans with
disabilities to wait 24 months for Medicare coverage, the current law
effectively sentences these people to inadequate health care, poverty,
or death . . . Since disability can strike anyone, at any point in
life, the 24-month waiting period should be of concern to everyone, not
just the millions of Americans with disabilities today.''
Although elimination of the Medicare waiting period will certainly
increase Medicare costs, it is important

[[Page S6321]]

to note that there will be some corresponding decrease in Medicaid
costs. Medicaid, which is financed by both Federal and State
governments, often provides coverage for a subset of disabled Americans
in the waiting period, as long as they meet certain income and asset
limits. Income limits are typically at or below the poverty level,
including at just 74 percent of the poverty line in New Mexico, with
assets generally limited to just $2,000 for individuals and $3,000 for
couples.
The Commonwealth Fund estimates that, of the 1.26 million people in
the waiting period, 40 percent are enrolled in Medicaid. As a result,
the Commonwealth Fund estimates in the study that Federal Medicaid
savings would offset nearly 30 percent of the increased costs.
Furthermore, States, which have been struggling financially with their
Medicaid programs, would reap a windfall that would help them better
manage their Medicaid programs.
Furthermore, from a continuity of care point of view, it makes little
sense that somebody with disabilities must leave their job and their
health providers associated with that plan, move on the Medicaid to
often have a different set of providers, to then switch to Medicare and
yet another set of providers. The cost, both financial and personal, of
not providing access to care or poorly coordinated care services for
these seriously ill people during the waiting period may be greater in
many cases than providing health coverage.
And finally, private-sector employers and employees in those risk-
pools would also benefit from the passage of the bill. As the 2003
report notes, ``. . . to the extent that disabled adults rely on
coverage through their prior employer or their spouse's employer,
eliminating the waiting period would also produce savings to employers
who provide this coverage.''
To address concerns about costs and immediate impact on the Medicare
program, the legislation phases out the waiting period over a 10-year
period. In the interim, the legislation would create a process by which
others with life-threatening illnesses could also get an exception to
the waiting period. Congress has previously extended such an exception
to the waiting period for individuals with amyothrophic lateral
sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, and for hospice
services. The ALS exception passed the Congress in December 2000 and
went into effect July 1, 2001. Thus, the legislation would extend the
exception to all people with life-threatening illnesses in the waiting
period.
I would like to thank Senator DeWine and the other original
cosponsors, including Senators Corzine, Durbin, Schumer, Johnson,
Cantwell, Lautenberg, Stabenow, Kennedy, Clinton, Kerry, Mikulski,
Akaka, Salazar, and Sarbanes, for supporting this critically important
legislation. Furthermore, I would like to commend Representative Gene
Green of Texas for his introduction of the companion bill in the House
of Representatives and for his work, diligence, and commitment to this
issue.
I urge passage of this legislation and ask unanimous consent that a
fact sheet, which includes a list of original supporting organizations
for the legislation, and the text of the bill be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the materials were ordered to be printed in
the Record as follows:

Fact Sheet

ending the medicare disability waiting period act of 2005

Senators Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) and Mike DeWine (R-OH) are
preparing to introduce the ``Medicare Disability Waiting
Period Act of 2005.'' The bill would, over 10 years,
completely phase-out the two-year waiting period which
Americans with disabilities must endure before receiving
Medicare coverage. The legislation also creates a process by
which the Secretary can immediately waive the waiting period
for people with life-threatening illnesses.
When Medicare was expanded in 1972 to include people who
have significant disabilities, lawmakers created a ``Medicare
waiting period.'' Before they can get Medicare coverage,
people with disabilities must first receive Social Security
Disability Insurance (SSDI) for 24 months. Generally, SSDI
begins five months after an individual's disability has been
certified. As a result, people with disabilities face three
consecutive waiting periods prior to getting health coverage:
(1) a determination of SSDI approval from the Social Security
Administration; (2) a five-month waiting period to receive
SSDI; and, (3) another 24-month waiting period to get
Medicare coverage.
Because of the 24-month Medicare waiting period, an
estimated 400,000 Americans with disabilities are uninsured
and many more are underinsured at a time in their lives when
the need for health coverage is most dire, Dale and Verdier,
The Commonwealth Fund, July 2003. In fact, various studies
show that death rates among SSDI recipients are highest
during the first two years of enrollment, Mauney, AMA, June
2002. For example, according to the Commonwealth Fund, 4
percent of these people die during the waiting period.
There is an important exception to the 24-month waiting
period and that is for individuals with amyothrophic lateral
sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease, and for
hospice services. The ALS exception passed the Congress in
December 2000 and went into effect July 1, 2001.
``Ending the Medicare Waiting Period Act of 2005'' would,
over 10 years, phase-out the waiting period and would also,
in the interim, create a process by which others with life-
threatening illnesses, like ALS, could also get an exception
to the waiting period.
As the Medicare Rights Center has said, ``By forcing
Americans with disabilities to wait 24 months for Medicare
coverage, the current law effectively sentences these people
to inadequate health care, poverty or death. . . . Since
disability can strike anyone, at any point in life, the 24-
month waiting period should be of concern to everyone, not
just the millions of Americans with disabilities today.''
If you have any questions or need additional information,
please contact Bruce Lesley in Senator Bingaman's office at
202-224-5521 or Abby Kral in Senator DeWine's office at 202-
224-7900.

Supporting Organizations

Acid Maltase Deficiency Association
AIDS Foundation of Chicago
The AIDS Institute
AIDS Project Los Angeles
Air Compassion America
Alzheimer's Association
American Academy of Audiology
American Academy of HIV Medicine
American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine (ACRM)
American Congress of Community Supports and Employment
Services (ACCSES)
American Dance Therapy Association
American Gastroenterological Association
American Network of Community Options and Resources
American Occupational Therapy Association
American Psychological Association
Angel Flight Mid-Atlantic
The Arc of the United States
Association for Community Affiliated Plans
Association of University Centers on Disabilities (AUCD)
Benign Essential Blepharospasm Research Foundation
Brian Tumor Action Network
California Health Advocates
Center for Medicare Advocacy, Inc.
Coalition for Pulmonary Fibrosis
Community Action New Mexico
Disability Service Providers of America (DSPA)
Empowering Our Communities in New Mexico
Families USA
Family Voices
Gay Men's Health Crisis
Harm Reduction Coalition
Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (HHT) Foundation
International
HIV Medicine Association
HIVictorious, Inc., Madison, WI
Medicare Rights Center
Mercy Medical Airlift
Miami, ACT UP
National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI)
National Alliance of State and Territorial AIDS Directors
(NASTAD)
National Association of Children's Behavioral Health
National Association of Councils on Developmental
Disabilities (NACDD)
National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems
(NAPAS)
National Ataxia Foundation
National Health Law Program (NHeLP)
National Kidney Foundation
National Mental Health Association
National Minority AIDS Council
National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD)
National Patient Advocacy Foundation
National Women's Law Center
New Mexico AIDS Services
New Mexico Medical Society
New Mexico POZ Coalition
New Mexico Public Health Association
North American Brain Tumor Coalition
Paralyzed Veterans of America
Power Mobility Coalition
Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy Syndrome Association of
America
Senior Citizens Law Office, New Mexico
Southern New Hampshire HIV/AIDS Task Force
Special Olympics
The Title II Community AIDS National Network
United Cerebral Palsy
United Spinal Association
Utah AIDS Foundation
Visiting Nurse Associations of America
Von Hippel-Lindau Family Alliance

[[Page S6322]]

S. 1217

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Ending the
Medicare Disability Waiting Period Act of 2005''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Phase-out of waiting period for medicare disability benefits.
Sec. 3. Elimination of waiting period for individuals with life-
threatening conditions.
Sec. 4. Institute of Medicine study and report on delay and prevention
of disability conditions.

SEC. 2. PHASE-OUT OF WAITING PERIOD FOR MEDICARE DISABILITY
BENEFITS.

(a) In General.--Section 226(b) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 426(b)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ``, and has for 24
calendar months been entitled to,'' and inserting ``, and for
the waiting period (as defined in subsection (k)) has been
entitled to,'';
(2) in paragraph (2)(B), by striking ``, and has been for
not less than 24 months,'' and inserting ``, and has been for
the waiting period (as defined in subsection (k)),'';
(3) in paragraph (2)(C)(ii), by striking ``, including the
requirement that he has been entitled to the specified
benefits for 24 months,'' and inserting ``, including the
requirement that the individual has been entitled to the
specified benefits for the waiting period (as defined in
subsection (k)),''; and
(4) in the flush matter following paragraph
(2)(C)(ii)(II)--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``for each month
beginning with the later of (I) July 1973 or (II) the twenty-
fifth month of his entitlement or status as a qualified
railroad retirement beneficiary described in paragraph (2),
and'' and inserting ``for each month beginning after the
waiting period (as so defined) for which the individual
satisfies paragraph (2) and'';
(B) in the second sentence, by striking ``the `twenty-fifth
month of his entitlement' refers to the first month after the
twenty-fourth month of entitlement to specified benefits
referred to in paragraph (2)(C) and''; and
(C) in the third sentence, by striking ``, but not in
excess of 78 such months''.
(b) Schedule for Phase-out of Waiting Period.--Section 226
of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 426) is amended by
adding at the end the following new subsection:
``(k) For purposes of subsection (b) (and for purposes of
section 1837(g)(1) of this Act and section 7(d)(2)(ii) of the
Railroad Retirement Act of 1974), the term `waiting period'
means--
``(1) for 2006, 18 months;
``(2) for 2007, 16 months;
``(3) for 2008, 14 months;
``(4) for 2009, 12 months;
``(5) for 2010, 10 months;
``(6) for 2011, 8 months;
``(7) for 2012, 6 months;
``(8) for 2013, 4 months;
``(9) for 2014, 2 months; and
``(10) for 2015 and each subsequent year, 0 months.''.
(c) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) Sunset.--Effective January 1, 2015, subsection (f) of
section 226 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 426) is
repealed.
(2) Medicare description.--Section 1811(2) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1395c(2)) is amended by striking ``entitled for not
less than 24 months'' and inserting ``entitled for the
waiting period (as defined in section 226(k))''.
(3) Medicare coverage.--Section 1837(g)(1) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1395p(g)(1)) is amended by striking ``of the later of
(A) April 1973 or (B) the third month before the 25th month
of such entitlement'' and inserting ``of the third month
before the first month following the waiting period (as
defined in section 226(k)) applicable under section 226(b)''.
(4) Railroad retirement system.--Section 7(d)(2)(ii) of the
Railroad Retirement Act of 1974 (45 U.S.C. 231f(d)(2)(ii)) is
amended--
(A) by striking ``, for not less than 24 months'' and
inserting ``, for the waiting period (as defined in section
226(k) of the Social Security Act); and
(B) by striking ``could have been entitled for 24 calendar
months, and'' and inserting ``could have been entitled for
the waiting period (as defined is section 226(k) of the
Social Security Act), and''.
(d) Effective Date.--Except as provided in subsection
(c)(1), the amendments made by this section shall apply to
insurance benefits under title XVIII of the Social Security
Act with respect to items and services furnished in months
beginning at least 90 days after the date of the enactment of
this Act (but in no case earlier than January 1, 2006).

SEC. 3. ELIMINATION OF WAITING PERIOD FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH
LIFE-THREATENING CONDITIONS.

(a) In General.--Section 226(h) of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 426(h)) is amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) as
subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C), respectively;
(2) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) (as
redesignated by paragraph (1)), by inserting ``(1)'' after
``(h)'';
(3) in paragraph (1) (as designated by paragraph (2))--
(A) in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) (as
redesignated by paragraph (1)), by inserting ``or any other
life-threatening condition identified by the Secretary''
after ``amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS)''; and
(4) in subparagraph (B) (as redesignated by paragraph (1)),
by striking ``(rather than twenty-fifth month)''; and
(5) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(2) For purposes of identifying life-threatening
conditions under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall compile a
list of conditions that are fatal without medical treatment.
In compiling such list, the Secretary shall consult with the
Director of the National Institutes of Health (including the
Office of Rare Diseases), the Director of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention, the Director of the National
Science Foundation, and the Institute of Medicine of the
National Academy of Sciences.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to insurance benefits under title XVIII of the
Social Security Act with respect to items and services
furnished in months beginning at least 90 days after the date
of the enactment of this Act (but in no case earlier than
January 1, 2006).

SEC. 4. INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE STUDY AND REPORT ON DELAY AND
PREVENTION OF DISABILITY CONDITIONS.

(a) Study.--The Secretary of Health and Human Services (in
this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall request
that the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of
Sciences conduct a study on the range of disability
conditions that can be delayed or prevented if individuals
receive access to health care services and coverage before
the condition reaches disability levels.
(b) Report.--Not later than the date that is 2 years after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit
to Congress a report containing the results of the Institute
of Medicine study authorized under this section.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this section $750,000 for the
period of fiscal years 2006 and 2007.
______

By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
S. 1218. A bill to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
of 1965, the Higher Education Act of 1965, and the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 to improve recruitment, preparation, distribution, and
retention of public elementary and secondary school teachers and
principals, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, it is a privilege to join my
distinguished colleague, Senator Durbin, in introducing the Teacher
Excellence for All Children Act of 2005. Its goal is to bring us closer
to giving every child a highly qualified teacher, and enable more
teachers to obtain the support they need to improve their instruction.
We join our distinguished colleague Congressman George Miller in this
effort, who is introducing this legislation in the House, and commend
him for his leadership on the issue.
One of the major challenges we face today is to improve the
recruitment, preparation, and retention of good teachers. Few issues
are of greater importance to our future than education. The Nation is
strongest when our schools are strongest--when all students can attend
good schools with good teachers to help them learn. In this new era of
globalization, a well-educated citizenry and well-skilled workforce are
essential to our role in the world.
We owe a great debt to America's teachers. They work day in and day
out to give children a decent education. Teachers are on the front
lines in the Nation's schools, and at the forefront of the constant
effort to improve public education. It is their vision, energy, hard
work, and dedication that will make all the difference in successfully
meeting this challenge.
We took a major step forward in the No Child Left Behind Act and its
recognition that all students deserve first-rate teachers to help them
reach their potential and succeed in life. This act made a bold
national commitment to guarantee a highly qualified teacher in every
classroom. But to reach that goal, we need to recruit, train, retain
and support our teachers. The TEACH Act addresses four specific
challenges head on: to increase the supply of outstanding teachers; to
ensure all children have teachers with expertise in the subjects they
teach; to improve teaching by identifying and rewarding the best
practices and expanding professional development opportunities; and to
help schools retain teachers and principals by providing the support
they need to succeed.
Since enrollment in public schools has reached an all-time high of 53
million students, and is expected to keep

[[Page S6323]]

increasing over the next decade, additional highly qualified teachers
are needed to meet the growing demand.
Many schools face a teacher crisis, particularly in our poorest
communities. Currently, there are approximately 3 million public school
teachers across the country. Two million new, qualified teachers will
be needed in the next 10 years to serve the growing student population.
Yet we are not even retaining the teachers we have today. A third of
all teachers leave during their first 3 years, and almost half leave
during the first 5 years.
Too often, teachers also lack the training and support needed to do
well in the classroom. They are paid on average almost $8,000 less than
graduates in other fields, and the gap widens to more than $23,000
after 15 years of teaching. Thirty-seven percent of teachers cite low
salaries as a main factor for leaving the classroom before retirement.
The TEACH Act will do more to recruit and retain highly qualified
teachers--particularly in schools and subjects where they are needed
the most. The bill provides financial incentives to encourage talented
persons to enter and remain in the profession and it offers higher
salaries, tax breaks, and greater loan forgiveness.
To attract motivated and talented individuals to teaching, the bill
provides up-front tuition assistance--$4,000 per year--to high-
performing undergraduate students who agree to commit to teach for 4
years in high-need areas and in subjects such as math, science, and
special education.
One of our greatest challenges in school reform today is to equalize
the playing field, so that the neediest students have access to the
best teachers to help them succeed. Research shows that good teachers
are the single most important factor in the success of children in
school, both academically and developmentally. Children with good
instruction can reach new heights through the hard work, vision, and
energy of their teachers. Good teaching helps overcome the harmful
effects of poverty and other disadvantages on student learning.
Unfortunately, we still have a long way to go. In high-poverty
schools, teacher turnover is 33 percent higher than in other schools.
In the poorest middle schools and high schools, students are 77 percent
more likely to be assigned an out-of-field teacher. Almost a third of
classes are taught by teachers with no background in the subject--no
major degree, no minor degree, no certification.
Despite our past efforts, this problem is worsening. In most academic
subjects, the percentage of secondary school teachers ``out-of-
field''--those teaching a class in which they do not have a major, a
minor, or a certification--increased from 1993 to 2000. Clearly, we
must do a better job of attracting better teachers to the neediest
classrooms and do more to reward their efforts so that they stay in the
classroom.
Because schools compete for the best teachers, the bill provides
funding to school districts to reward teachers who transfer to schools
with the greatest challenges, and provides incentives for teachers
working in math, science, and special education.
The TEACH Act also establishes a framework to develop and use the
systems needed at the State and local levels to identify and improve
teacher effectiveness and recognize exceptional teaching in the
classroom. States will develop data systems to track student progress
and relate it to the level of instruction provided in the classroom.
The bill also encourages the development of model teacher advancement
programs with competitive compensation structures that recognize and
reward different roles, responsibilities, knowledge, skills and
positive results.
Too often, teachers lack the training they need before reaching the
classroom. On the job, they have few sources of support to meet the
challenges they face in the classroom, and few opportunities for
ongoing professional development to expand their skills. The bill
responds to the needs of teachers in their first years in the classroom
by creating new and innovative teacher induction models that use proven
strategies to support beginning teachers. New teachers will have access
to mentoring, opportunities for cooperative planning with their peers,
and a special transition year to ease into the pressures of entering
the classroom. Veteran teachers will have an opportunity to improve
their skills through peer mentoring and review. Other support includes
professional development delivered through teaching centers to improve
training and working conditions for teachers.
Since good leadership is also essential for schools, the bill
provides important incentives and support for principals by raising
standards and improving recruitment and training for them as well.
This legislation was developed with the help of a broad and diverse
group of educational professionals and experts, including the Alliance
for Excellent Education, the American Federation of Teachers, the
Business Roundtable, the Center for American Progress Action Fund, the
Children's Defense Fund, the Education Trust, the National Council on
Teacher Quality, the National Council of La Raza, the National
Education Association, New Leaders for New Schools, the New Teacher
Center, Operation Public Education, the Teacher Advancement Program
Foundation, Teach for America and the Teaching Commission. I thank them
for their help and their work on behalf of our Nation's children.
As Shirley Mount Hufstedler, the first United States Secretary of
Education, has said:

The role of the teacher remains the highest calling of a
free people. To the teacher, America entrusts her most
precious resource, her children; and asks that they be
prepared, in all their glorious diversity, to face the rigors
of individual participation in a democratic society.

We must do all in our power to help them in this endeavor.
I urge my colleagues to join in supporting this bill and 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. 1218

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 ``Teacher Excellence for All
Children Act of 2005''.

SEC. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS.

The table of contents of this Act is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title.
Sec. 2. Table of contents.
Sec. 3. Findings.

TITLE I--RECRUITING TALENTED NEW TEACHERS

Sec. 101. Amendments to Higher Education Act of 1965.
Sec. 102. Extending and expanding teacher loan forgiveness.

TITLE II--CLOSING THE TEACHER DISTRIBUTION GAP

Sec. 201. Grants to local educational agencies to provide premium pay
to teachers in high-need schools.

TITLE III--IMPROVING TEACHER PREPARATION

Sec. 301. Amendment to Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
Sec. 302. Amendment to the Higher Education Act of 1965: Teacher
Quality Enhancement Grants.
Sec. 303. Enforcing NCLB's teacher equity provision.

TITLE IV--EQUIPPING TEACHERS, SCHOOLS, LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES, AND
STATES WITH THE 21ST CENTURY DATA, TOOLS, AND ASSESSMENTS THEY NEED

Sec. 401. 21st Century Data, Tools, and Assessments.
Sec. 402. Collecting national data on distribution of teachers.

TITLE V--RETENTION: KEEPING OUR BEST TEACHERS IN THE CLASSROOM

Sec. 501. Amendment to Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
Sec. 502. Exclusion from gross income of compensation of teachers and
principals in certain high-need schools or teaching high-
need subjects.
Sec. 503. Above-the-line deduction for certain expenses of elementary
and secondary school teachers increased and made
permanent.

TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 601. Conforming amendments.

SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

The Congress finds as follows:
(1) There are not enough qualified teachers in the Nation's
classrooms, and an unprecedented number of teachers will
retire over the next 5 years. Over the next decade, the
Nation will need to bring 2,000,000 new teachers into public
schools.
(2) Too many teachers and principals do not receive
adequate preparation for their jobs.

[[Page S6324]]

(3) More than one-third of children in grades 7-12 are
taught by a teacher who lacks both a college major and
certification in the subject being taught. Rates of ``out-of-
field teaching'' are especially high in high-poverty schools.
(4) Seventy percent of mathematics classes in high-poverty
middle schools are assigned to teachers without even a minor
in mathematics or a related field.
(5) Teacher turnover is a serious problem, particularly in
urban and rural areas. Over one-third of new teachers leave
the profession within their first 3 years of teaching, and 14
percent of new teachers leave the field within the first
year. After 5 years--the average time it takes for teachers
to maximize students' learning--half of all new teachers will
have exited the profession. Rates of teacher attrition are
highest in high-poverty schools. Between 2000 and 2001, 1 out
of 5 teachers in the Nation's high-poverty schools either
left to teach in another school or dropped out of teaching
altogether.
(6) Fourth graders who are poor score dramatically lower on
the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) than
their counterparts who are not poor. Over 85 percent of
fourth graders who are poor failed to attain NAEP proficiency
standards in 2003.
(7) African-American, Latino, and low-income students are
much less likely than other students to have highly-qualified
teachers.
(8) Research shows that individual teachers have a great
impact on how well their students learn. The most effective
teachers have been shown to be able to boost their pupils'
learning by a full grade level relative to students taught by
less effective teachers.
(9) Although nearly half (42 percent) of all teachers hold
a master's degree, fewer than 1 in 4 secondary teachers have
a master's degree in the subject they teach.
(10) Young people with high SAT and ACT scores are much
less likely to choose teaching as a career. Those who have
higher SAT or ACT scores are twice as likely to leave the
profession after only a few years.
(11) Only 16 States finance new teacher induction programs,
and fewer still require inductees to be matched with mentors
who teach the same subject.

TITLE I--RECRUITING TALENTED NEW TEACHERS

SEC. 101. AMENDMENTS TO HIGHER EDUCATION ACT OF 1965.

(a) TEACH Grants.--Title II of the Higher Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1021 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following new part:

``PART C--TEACH GRANTS

``SEC. 231. PURPOSES.

``The purposes of this part are--
``(1) to improve student academic achievement;
``(2) to help recruit and prepare teachers to meet the
national demand for a highly qualified teacher in every
classroom; and
``(3) to increase opportunities for Americans of all
educational, ethnic, class, and geographic backgrounds to
become highly qualified teachers.

``SEC. 232. PROGRAM ESTABLISHED.

``(a) Program Authority.--
``(1) Payments required.--For each of the fiscal years 2006
through 2013, the Secretary shall pay to each eligible
institution such sums as may be necessary to pay to each
eligible student (defined in accordance with section 484) who
files an application and agreement in accordance with section
233, and qualifies under subsection (a)(2) of such section, a
TEACH Grant in the amount of $4,000 for each academic year
during which that student is in attendance at an institution
of higher education.
``(2) Reference.--Grants made under this part shall be
known as `Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher
Education Grants' or `TEACH Grants'.
``(b) Payment Methodology.--
``(1) Prepayment.--Not less than 85 percent of such sums
shall be advanced to eligible institutions prior to the start
of each payment period and shall be based upon an amount
requested by the institution as needed to pay eligible
students until such time as the Secretary determines and
publishes in the Federal Register with an opportunity for
comment, an alternative payment system that provides payments
to institutions in an accurate and timely manner, except that
this sentence shall not be construed to limit the authority
of the Secretary to place an institution on a reimbursement
system of payment.
``(2) Direct payment.--Nothing in this section shall be
interpreted to prohibit the Secretary from paying directly to
students, in advance of the beginning of the academic term,
an amount for which they are eligible, in cases where the
eligible institution elects not to participate in the
disbursement system required by paragraph (1) .
``(3) Distribution of grants to students.--Payments under
this part shall be made, in accordance with regulations
promulgated by the Secretary for such purpose, in such manner
as will best accomplish the purposes of this part. Any
disbursement allowed to be made by crediting the student's
account shall be limited to tuition and fees and, in the case
of institutionally owned housing, room and board. The student
may elect to have the institution provide other such goods
and services by crediting the student's account.
``(c) Reductions in Amount.--
``(1) Part time students.--In any case where a student
attends an institution of higher education on less than a
full-time basis (including a student who attends an
institution of higher education on less than a half-time
basis) during any academic year, the amount of the TEACH
Grant to which that student is eligible shall be reduced in
proportion to the degree to which that student is not so
attending on a full-time basis, in accordance with a schedule
of reductions established by the Secretary for the purpose of
this part, computed in accordance with this part. Such
schedule of reductions shall be established by regulation and
published in the Federal Register in accordance with section
482 of this Act.
``(2) No exceeding cost.--No TEACH Grant for a student
under this part shall exceed the cost of attendance (as
defined in section 472) at the institution at which such
student is in attendance. If, with respect to any student, it
is determined that the amount of a TEACH Grant exceeds the
cost of attendance for that year, the amount of the TEACH
Grant shall be reduced until the TEACH Grant does not exceed
the cost of attendance at such institution.
``(d) Period of Eligibility for Grants.--
``(1) Undergraduate students.--The period during which an
undergraduate student may receive TEACH Grants shall be the
period required for the completion of the first undergraduate
baccalaureate course of study being pursued by that student
at the institution at which the student is in attendance,
except that--
``(A) any period during which the student is enrolled in a
noncredit or remedial course of study, subject to paragraph
(3), shall not be counted for the purpose of this paragraph;
and
``(B) the total amount that a student may receive under
this part for undergraduate study shall not exceed $16,000.
``(2) Graduate students.--The period during which a
graduate student may receive TEACH Grants shall be the period
required for the completion of a master's degree course of
study being pursued by that student at the institution at
which the student is in attendance, except that the total
amount that a student may receive under this part for
graduate study shall not exceed $8,000.
``(3) Remedial course; study abroad.--Nothing in this
section shall exclude from eligibility courses of study that
are noncredit or remedial in nature (including courses in
English language acquisition) that are determined by the
institution to be necessary to help the student be prepared
for the pursuit of a first undergraduate baccalaureate degree
or certificate or, in the case of courses in English language
instruction, to be necessary to enable the student to utilize
already existing knowledge, training, or skills. Nothing in
this section shall exclude from eligibility programs of study
abroad that are approved for credit by the home institution
at which the student is enrolled.

``SEC. 233. ELIGIBILITY AND APPLICATIONS FOR GRANTS.

``(a) Applications; Demonstration of Eligibility.--
``(1) Filing required.--The Secretary shall from time to
time set dates by which students shall file applications for
TEACH Grants under this part. Each student desiring a TEACH
Grant for any year shall file an application therefore
containing such information and assurances as the Secretary
may deem necessary to enable the Secretary to carry out the
functions and responsibilities of this part.
``(2) Demonstration of eligibility.--Each such application
shall contain such information as is necessary to demonstrate
that--
``(A) if the applicant is an enrolled student--
``(i) the student is an eligible student for purposes of
section 484 (other than subsection (r) of such section);
``(ii) the student--

``(I) has a grade point average that is determined, under
standards prescribed by the Secretary, to be comparable to a
3.25 average on a zero to 4.0 scale, except that, if the
student is in the first year of a program of undergraduate
education, such grade point average shall be determined on
the basis of the student's cumulative high school grade point
average; or
``(II) displayed high academic aptitude by receiving a
score above the 75th percentile on at least one of the
batteries in an undergraduate or graduate school admissions
test; and

``(iii) the student is completing coursework and other
requirements necessary to begin a career in teaching, or
plans to complete such coursework and requirements prior to
graduating; or
``(B) if the applicant is a current or prospective teacher
applying for a grant to obtain a graduate degree--
``(i) the applicant is a teacher or a retiree from another
occupation with expertise in a field in which there is a
shortage of teachers, such as mathematics, science, special
education, English language acquisition, or another high-need
subject; or
``(ii) the applicant is or was a teacher who is using high-
quality alternative certification routes, such as Teach for
America, to get certified.
``(b) Agreements to Serve.--Each application under
subsection (a) shall contain or be accompanied by an
agreement by the applicant that--
``(1) the applicant will--
``(A) serve as a full-time teacher for a total of not less
than 4 academic years within 8

[[Page S6325]]

years after completing the course of study for which the
applicant received a TEACH Grant under this part;
``(B) teach--
``(i) in a school described in section 465(a)(2)(A); and
``(ii) in any of the following fields: mathematics,
science, a foreign language, bilingual education, or special
education, or as a reading specialist, or another field
documented as high-need by the Federal Government, State
government, or local education agency and submitted to the
Secretary;
``(C) submit evidence of such employment in the form of a
certification by the chief administrative officer of the
school upon completion of each year of such service; and
``(D) comply with the requirements for being a highly
qualified teacher as defined in section 9101 of the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
``(2) in the event that the applicant is determined to have
failed or refused to carry out such service obligation, the
sum of the amounts of such Teach Grants will be treated as a
loan and collected from the applicant in accordance with
subsection (c) and the regulations thereunder.
``(c) Repayment for Failure to Complete Service.--In the
event that any recipient of a TEACH Grant fails or refuses to
comply with the service obligation in the agreement under
subsection (b), the sum of the amounts of such Grants
provided to such recipient shall be treated as a Direct Loan
under part D of title IV, and shall be subject to repayment
in accordance with terms and conditions specified by the
Secretary in regulations promulgated to carry out this
part.''.
(b) Recruiting Teachers With Mathematics, Science, or
Language Major.--Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1021 et seq.), as amended by subsection (a), is
further amended by adding at the end the following:

``PART D--RECRUITING TEACHERS WITH MATHEMATICS, SCIENCE, OR LANGUAGE
MAJORS

``SEC. 241. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

``(a) Grants Authorized.--From the amounts appropriated
under section 242, the Secretary shall make competitive
grants to institutions of higher education to improve the
availability and recruitment of teachers from among students
majoring in mathematics, science, foreign languages, special
education, or teaching the English language to students with
limited English proficiency. In making such grants, the
Secretary shall give priority to programs that focus on
preparing teachers in subjects in which there is a shortage
of highly qualified teachers and that prepare students to
teach in high-need schools.
``(b) Application.--Any institution of higher education
desiring to obtain a grant under this part shall submit to
the Secretary an application at such time, in such form, and
containing such information and assurances as the Secretary
may require, which shall--
``(1) include reporting on baseline production of teachers
with expertise in mathematics, science, a foreign language,
or teaching English language learners; and
``(2) establish a goal and timeline for increasing the
number of such teachers who are prepared by the institution.
``(c) Use of Funds.--Funds made available by a grant under
this part--
``(1) shall be used to create new recruitment incentives to
teaching from other majors, with an emphasis on high-need
subjects such as mathematics, science, foreign languages, and
teaching the English language to students with limited
English proficiency;
``(2) may be used to upgrade curriculum in order to provide
all students studying to become teachers with high-quality
instructional strategies for teaching reading and teaching
the English language to students with limited English
proficiency, and for modifying instruction to teach students
with special needs;
``(3) may be used to integrate school of education faculty
with other arts and science faculty in mathematics, science,
foreign languages, and teaching the English language to
students with limited English proficiency through steps such
as--
``(A) dual appointments for faculty between schools of
education and schools of arts and science; and
``(B) integrating coursework with clinical experience; and
``(4) may be used to develop strategic plans between
schools of education and local school districts to better
prepare teachers for high-need schools, including the
creation of professional development partnerships for
training new teachers in state-of-the-art practice.

``SEC. 242. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

``There are authorized to be appropriated to make grants
under this part $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and such
sums as may be necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal
years.''.
(c) Part A Authorization.--Section 210 of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1030) is amended--
(1) by striking ``$300,000,000 for fiscal year 1999'' and
inserting ``$400,000,000 for fiscal year 2006''; and
(2) by striking ``4 succeeding'' and inserting ``5
succeeding''.

SEC. 102. EXTENDING AND EXPANDING TEACHER LOAN FORGIVENESS.

(a) Permanent Extension.--Section 3(b)(3) of the Taxpayer-
Teacher Protection Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-409; 118 Stat. 2300)
is amended by striking ``1998, and before October 1, 2005''
and inserting ``1998''.
(b) Increased Amount; Applicability of Expanded Program to
Reading Specialist.--Sections 428J(c)(3) and 460(c)(3) of the
Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1078-10(c)(3),
1087j(c)(3)) are each amended--
(1) by striking ``$17,500'' and inserting ``$20,000'';
(2) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (A)(ii);
(3) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph
(B)(iii) and inserting ``; and''; and
(4) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(C) an elementary or secondary school teacher who
primarily teaches reading and who--
``(i) has obtained a separate reading instruction
credential from the State in which the teacher is employed;
and
``(ii) is certified by the chief administrative officer of
the public or nonprofit private elementary school or
secondary school in which the borrower is employed to teach
reading--

``(I) as being proficient in teaching the essential
components of reading instruction, as defined in section 1208
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965; and
``(II) as having such credential.''.

(c) Annual Increments Instead of End of Service Lump
Sums.--
(1) FFEL loans.--Section 428J(c) of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1078-10(c)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(4) Annual increments.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in
the case of an individual qualifying for loan forgiveness
under paragraph (3), the Secretary shall, in lieu of waiting
to assume an obligation only upon completion of 5 complete
years of service, assume the obligation to repay--
``(A) after each of the first and second years of service
by an individual in a position qualifying under paragraph
(3), 15 percent of the total amount of principal and interest
of the loans described in paragraph (1) to such individual
that are outstanding immediately preceding such first year of
such service;
``(B) after each of the third and fourth years of such
service, 20 percent of such total amount; and
``(C) after the fifth year of such service, 30 percent of
such total amount.''.
(2) Direct loans.--Section 460(c) of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087j(c)) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(4) Annual increments.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), in
the case of an individual qualifying for loan cancellation
under paragraph (3), the Secretary shall, in lieu of waiting
to assume an obligation only upon completion of 5 complete
years of service, assume the obligation to repay--
``(A) after each of the first and second years of service
by an individual in a position qualifying under paragraph
(3), 15 percent of the total amount of principal and interest
of the loans described in paragraph (1) to such individual
that are outstanding immediately preceding such first year of
such service;
``(B) after each of the third and fourth years of such
service, 20 percent of such total amount; and
``(C) after the fifth year of such service, 30 percent of
such total amount.''.

TITLE II--CLOSING THE TEACHER DISTRIBUTION GAP

SEC. 201. GRANTS TO LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES TO PROVIDE
PREMIUM PAY TO TEACHERS IN HIGH-NEED SCHOOLS.

Title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 6601 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following:

``PART E--TEACHER EXCELLENCE FOR ALL CHILDREN

``SEC. 2500. DEFINITIONS.

``In this part:
``(1) The term `high-need local educational agency' means a
local educational agency--
``(A) that serves not fewer than 10,000 children from
families with incomes below the poverty line, or for which
not less than 20 percent of the children served by the agency
are from families with incomes below the poverty line; and
``(B) that is having or expected to have difficulty filling
teacher vacancies or hiring new teachers who are highly
qualified.
``(2) The term `value-added longitudinal data system' means
a longitudinal data system for determining value-added
student achievement gains.
``(3) The term `value-added student achievement gains'
means student achievement gains determined by means of a
system that--
``(A) is sufficiently sophisticated and valid--
``(i) to deal with the problem of students with incomplete
records;
``(ii) to enable estimates to be precise and to use all the
data for all students in multiple years, regardless of
sparseness, in order to avoid measurement error in test
scores (such as by using multivariate, longitudinal
analyses); and
``(iii) to protect against inappropriate testing practices
or improprieties in test administration;
``(B) includes a way to acknowledge the existence of
influences on student growth, such as pull-out programs for
support beyond

[[Page S6326]]

standard delivery of instruction, so that affected teachers
do not receive an unfair advantage; and
``(C) has the capacity to assign various proportions of
student growth to multiple teachers when the classroom
reality, such as team teaching and departmentalized
instruction, makes such type of instruction an issue.

``Subpart 1--Distribution

``SEC. 2501. PREMIUM PAY; LOAN REPAYMENT.

``(a) Grants.--The Secretary shall make grants to local
educational agencies to provide higher salaries to exemplary,
highly qualified principals and exemplary, highly qualified
teachers with at least 3 years of experience, including
teachers certified by the National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards, if the principal or teacher agrees to
serve full-time for a period of 4 consecutive school years at
a public high-need elementary school or a public high-need
secondary school.
``(b) Use of Funds.--A local educational agency that
receives a grant under this section may use funds made
available through the grant--
``(1) to provide to exemplary, highly qualified principals
up to $15,000 as an annual bonus for each of 4 consecutive
school years if the principal commits to work full-time for
such period in a public high-need elementary school or a
public high-need secondary school; and
``(2) to provide to exemplary, highly qualified teachers--
``(A) up to $10,000 as an annual bonus for each of 4
consecutive school years if the teacher commits to work full-
time for such period in a public high-need elementary school
or a public high-need secondary school; or
``(B) up to $12,500 as an annual bonus for each of 4
consecutive school years if the teacher commits to work full-
time for such period teaching a subject for which there is a
documented shortage of teachers in a public high-need
elementary school or a public high-need secondary school.
``(c) Timing of Payment.--A local educational agency
providing an annual bonus to a principal or teacher under
subsection (b) shall pay the bonus on completion of the
service requirement by the principal or teacher for the
applicable year.
``(d) Grant Period.--The Secretary shall make grants under
this section in yearly installments for a total period of 4
years.
``(e) Observation, Feedback, and Evaluation.--The Secretary
may make a grant to a local educational agency under this
section only if the State in which the agency is located or
the agency has in place or proposes a plan, developed on a
collaborative basis with the local teacher organization, to
develop a system in which principals and, if available,
master teachers rate teachers as exemplary. Such a system
shall be--
``(1) based on strong learning gains for students;
``(2) based on classroom observation and feedback at least
four times annually;
``(3) conducted by multiple sources, including master
teachers and principals; and
``(4) evaluated against research-validated rubrics that use
planning, instructional, and learning environment standards
to measure teaching performance.
``(f) Application Requirements.--To seek a grant under this
section, a local educational agency shall submit an
application at such time, in such manner, and containing such
information as the Secretary reasonably requires. At a
minimum, the application shall include the following:
``(1) A description of the agency's proposed new teacher
hiring timeline, including interim goals for any phase-in
period.
``(2) An assurance that the agency will--
``(A) pay matching funds for the program carried out with
the grant, which matching funds may be derived from funds
received under other provisions of this title;
``(B) commit to making the program sustainable over time;
``(C) create incentives to bring a critical mass of
exemplary, highly qualified teachers to each school whose
teachers will receive assistance under this section;
``(D) improve the school's working conditions through
activities that may include but are not limited to--
``(i) reducing class size;
``(ii) ensuring availability of classroom materials,
textbooks, and other supplies;
``(iii) improving or modernizing facilities; and
``(iv) upgrading safety; and
``(E) accelerate the timeline for hiring new teachers in
order to minimize the withdrawal of high-quality teacher
applicants and secure the best new teacher talent for their
hardest-to-staff schools.
``(3) An assurance that, in identifying exemplary teachers,
the system described in paragraph (1) will take into
consideration--
``(A) growth of the teacher's students on any tests
required by the State educational agency;
``(B) value-added student achievement gains if such teacher
is in a State that uses a value-added longitudinal data
system;
``(C) National Board for Professional Teaching Standards
certification; and
``(D) evidence of teaching skill documented in performance-
based assessments.
``(g) Hiring Highly Qualified Teachers Early and in a
Timely Manner.--
``(1) In general.--In addition to the requirements of
subsection (f), an application under such subsection shall
include a description of the steps the local educational
agency will take to enable all or a subset of the agency's
schools to hire new highly qualified teachers early and in a
timely manner, including--
``(A) requiring a clear and early notification date for
retiring teachers that is no later than March 15 each year;
``(B) providing schools with their staffing allocations no
later than April of the preceding school year;
``(C) enabling schools to consider external candidates at
the same time as internal candidates for available positions;
``(D) moving up the teacher transfer period to April and
not requiring schools to hire transferring or `excessed'
teachers from other schools without selection and consent;
and
``(E) establishing and implementing a new principal
accountability framework to ensure that principals with
increased hiring authority are improving teacher quality.
``(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection
shall be construed to alter or otherwise affect the rights,
remedies, and procedures afforded school or district
employees under Federal, State, or local laws (including
applicable regulations or court orders) or under the terms of
collective bargaining agreements, memoranda of understanding,
or other agreements between such employees and their
employers.
``(h) Priority.--In providing higher salaries to principals
and teachers under this section, a local educational agency
shall give priority to principals and teachers at schools
identified under section 1116 for school improvement,
corrective action, or restructuring.
``(i) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `high-need' means, with respect to an
elementary school or a secondary school, a school that serves
an eligible school attendance area in which not less than 65
percent of the children are from low-income families, based
on the number of children eligible for free and reduced
priced lunches under the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act, or in which not less than 65 percent of the
children enrolled are from such families.
``(2) The term `documented shortage of teachers'--
``(A) means a shortage of teachers documented in the needs
assessment submitted under section 2122 by the local
educational agency involved or some other official
demonstration of shortage by the local education agency; and
``(B) may include such a shortage in mathematics, science,
a foreign language, special education, bilingual education,
or reading.
``(3) The term `exemplary, highly qualified principal'
means a principal who--
``(A) demonstrates a belief that every student can achieve
at high levels;
``(B) demonstrates an ability to drive substantial gains in
academic achievement for all students while closing the
achievement gap for those farthest from meeting standards;
``(C) uses data to drive instructional improvement;
``(D) provides ongoing support and development for
teachers; and
``(E) builds a positive school community, treating every
student with respect and reinforcing high expectations for
all.
``(4) The term `exemplary, highly qualified teacher' means
a highly qualified teacher who is rated as exemplary pursuant
to a system described in subsection (e).
``(j) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this
section, there are authorized to be appropriated
$2,200,000,000 for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

``SEC. 2502. CAREER LADDERS FOR TEACHERS PROGRAM.

``(a) Grants.--The Secretary may make grants to local
educational agencies to establish and implement a Career
Ladders for Teachers Program in which the agency--
``(1) augments the salary of teachers in high-need
elementary schools and high-need secondary schools to
correspond to the increasing responsibilities and leadership
roles assumed by the teachers as they take on new
professional roles (such as serving on school leadership
teams, serving as instructional coaches, and serving in
hybrid roles), including by--
``(A) providing up to $10,000 as an annual augmentation to
master teachers (including teachers serving as master
teachers as part of a state-of the-art teacher induction
program under section 2511); and
``(B) providing up to $5,000 as an annual augmentation to
mentor teachers (including teachers serving as mentor
teachers as part of a state-of-the-art teacher induction
program under section 2511);
``(2) provides up to $4,000 as an annual bonus to all
career teachers, master teachers, and mentor teachers in
high-need elementary schools and high-need secondary schools
based on a combination of--
``(A) at least 3 classroom evaluations over the course of
the year that shall--
``(i) be conducted by multiple evaluators, including master
teachers and the principal;
``(ii) be based on classroom observation at least 3 times
annually; and
``(iii) be evaluated against research-validated benchmarks
that use planning, instructional, and learning environment
standards to measure teacher performance; and
``(B) the performance of the teacher's students as
determined by--
``(i) student growth on any test that is required by the
State educational agency or

[[Page S6327]]

local educational agency and is administered to the teacher's
students; or
``(ii) in States or local educational agencies with value-
added longitudinal data systems, whole-school value-added
student achievement gains and classroom-level value-added
student achievement gains; or
``(3) provides up to $4,000 as an annual bonus to
principals in elementary schools and secondary schools based
on the performance of the school's students, taking into
consideration whole-school value-added student achievement
gains in States that have value-added longitudinal data
systems and in which information on whole-school value-added
student achievement gains is available.
``(b) Eligibility Requirement.--A local educational agency
may not use any funds under this section to establish or
implement a Career Ladders for Teachers Program unless--
``(1) the percentage of teachers required by prevailing
union rules votes affirmatively to adopt the program; or
``(2) in States that do not recognize collective bargaining
between local educational agencies and teacher organizations,
at least 75 percent of the teachers in the local educational
agency vote affirmatively to adopt the program.
``(c) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `career teacher' means a teacher who has a
bachelor's degree and full credentials or alternative
certification including a passing level on elementary or
secondary subject matter assessments and professional
knowledge assessments.
``(2) The term `mentor teacher' means a teacher who--
``(A) has a bachelor's degree and full credentials or
alternative certification including a passing level on any
applicable elementary or secondary subject matter assessments
and professional knowledge assessments;
``(B) has a portfolio and a classroom demonstration showing
instructional excellence;
``(C) has an ability, as demonstrated by student data, to
increase student achievement through utilizing specific
instructional strategies;
``(D) has a minimum of 3 years of teaching experience;
``(E) is recommended by the principal and other current
master and mentor teachers;
``(F) is an excellent instructor and communicator with an
understanding of how to facilitate growth in the teachers the
teacher is mentoring; and
``(G) performs well as a mentor in established induction
and peer review and mentoring programs.
``(3) The term `master teacher' means a teacher who--
``(A) holds a master's degree in the relevant academic
discipline;
``(B) has at least 5 years of successful teaching
experience, as measured by performance evaluations, a
portfolio of work, or National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards certification;
``(C) demonstrates expertise in content, curriculum
development, student learning, test analysis, mentoring, and
professional development, as demonstrated by an advanced
degree, advanced training, career experience, or National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards certification;
``(D) presents student data that illustrates the teacher's
ability to increase student achievement through utilizing
specific instructional interventions;
``(E) has instructional expertise demonstrated through
model teaching, team teaching, video presentations, student
achievement gains, or National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards certification;
``(F) may hold a valid National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards certificate, may have passed another
rigorous standard, or may have been selected as a school,
district, or State teacher of the year; and
``(G) is currently participating, or has previously
participated, in a professional development program that
supports classroom teachers as mentors.
``(4) The term `high-need', with respect to an elementary
school or a secondary school, has the meaning given to that
term in section 2501.
``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this
section, there is authorized to be appropriated $200,000,000
for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be necessary for
each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.''.

TITLE III--IMPROVING TEACHER PREPARATION

SEC. 301. AMENDMENT TO ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT
OF 1965.

Part E of title II of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as added by title II of this Act, is
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Subpart 2--Preparation

``SEC. 2511. ESTABLISHING STATE-OF-THE-ART TEACHER INDUCTION
PROGRAMS.

``(a) Grants.--The Secretary may make grants to States and
eligible local educational agencies for the purpose of
developing state-of-the-art teacher induction programs.
``(b) Eligible Local Educational Agency.--In this section,
the term `eligible local educational agency' means--
``(1) a high-need local educational agency; or
``(2) a partnership of a high-need local educational agency
and an institution of higher education, a teacher
organization, or any other nonprofit education organization.
``(c) Use of Funds.--A State or an eligible local
educational agency that receives a grant under subsection (a)
shall use the funds made available through the grant to
develop a state-of the-art teacher induction program that--
``(1) provides new teachers a minimum of 3 years of
extensive, high-quality, comprehensive induction into the
field of teaching; and
``(2) includes--
``(A) structured mentoring from highly qualified master or
mentor teachers who are certified, have teaching experience
similar to the grade level or subject assignment of the new
teacher, and are trained to mentor new teachers;
``(B) at least 90 minutes each week of common meeting time
for a new teacher to discuss student work and teaching under
the director of a master or mentor teacher;
``(C) regular classroom observation in the new teacher's
classroom;
``(D) observation by the new teacher of the mentor
teacher's classroom;
``(E) intensive professional development activities for new
teachers that result in improved teaching leading to student
achievement, including lesson demonstration by master and
mentor teachers in the classroom, observation, and feedback;
``(F) training in effective instructional services and
classroom management strategies for mainstream teachers
serving students with disabilities and students with limited
English proficiency;
``(G) observation of teachers and feedback at least 4 times
each school year by multiple evaluators, including master
teachers and the principals, using research-validated
benchmarks of teaching skills and standards that are
developed with input from teachers;
``(H) paid release time for the mentor teacher for
mentoring, or salary supplements under section 2502, for
mentoring new teachers at a ratio of one full-time mentor to
every 12 new teachers;
``(I) a transition year to the classroom that includes a
reduced workload for beginning teachers; and
``(J) a standards-based assessment of every beginning
teacher to determine whether the teacher should move forward
in the teaching profession, which assessment may include
examination of practice and a measure of gains in student
learning.
``(d) Additional Requirement.--The Secretary shall
commission an independent evaluation of state-of the-art
teacher induction programs supported under this section in
order to compare the design and outcome of various models of
induction programs.
``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this
section, there is authorized to be appropriated $300,000,000
for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be necessary for
each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

``SEC. 2512. PEER MENTORING AND REVIEW PROGRAMS.

``(a) Grants.--The Secretary shall make grants to local
educational agencies for peer mentoring and review programs.
``(b) Use of Funds.--A local educational agency that
receives a grant under this section shall use the funds made
available through the grant to establish and implement a peer
mentoring and review program. Such a program shall be
established through collective bargaining agreements or, in
States that do not recognize collective bargaining between
local educational agencies and teacher organizations, through
joint agreements between the local educational agency and
affected teacher organizations.
``(c) Application.--To seek a grant under this section, a
local educational agency shall submit an application at such
time, in such manner, and containing such information as the
Secretary may reasonably require. The Secretary shall require
each such application to include the following:
``(1) Data from the applicant on recruitment and retention
prior to implementing the induction program.
``(2) Measurable goals for increasing retention after the
induction program is implemented.
``(3) Measures that will be used to determine whether
teacher effectiveness is improved through participation in
the induction program.
``(4) A plan for evaluating and reporting progress toward
meeting the applicant's goals.
``(d) Progress Reports.--The Secretary shall require each
grantee under this section to submit progress reports on an
annual basis.
``(e) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this
section, there are authorized to be appropriated $50,000,000
for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be necessary for
each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

``SEC. 2513. ESTABLISHING STATE-OF-THE-ART PRINCIPAL TRAINING
AND INDUCTION PROGRAMS AND PERFORMANCE-BASED
PRINCIPAL CERTIFICATION.

``(a) Grants.--The Secretary may make grants to not more
than 10 States to develop, implement, and evaluate pilot
programs for performance-based certification and training of
exemplary, highly qualified principals who can drive gains in
academic achievement for all children.
``(b) Program Requirements.--A pilot program developed
under this section--
``(1) shall pilot the development, implementation, and
evaluation of a statewide performance-based system for
certifying principals;

[[Page S6328]]

``(2) shall pilot and demonstrate the effectiveness of
statewide performance-based certification through support for
innovative performance-based programs on a smaller scale;
``(3) shall provide for certification of principals by
institutions with strong track records, such as a local
educational agency, nonprofit organization, or business
school, that is approved by the State for purposes of such
certification and has formalized partnerships with in-State
local educational agencies;
``(4) may be used to develop, sustain, and expand model
programs for recruiting and training aspiring and new
principals in both instructional leadership and general
management skills;
``(5) shall include evaluation of the results of the pilot
program and other in-State programs of principal preparation
(which evaluation may include value-added assessment scores
of all children in a school and should emphasize the
correlation of academic achievement gains in schools led by
participating principals and the characteristics and skills
demonstrated by those individuals when applying to and
participating in the program) to inform the design of
certification of individuals to become school leaders in the
State; and
``(6) shall make possible interim certification for up to 2
years for aspiring principals participating in the pilot
program who--
``(A) have not yet attained full certification;
``(B) are serving as assistant principals or principal
residents, or in positions of similar responsibility; and
``(C) have met clearly defined criteria for entry into the
program that are approved by the applicable local educational
agency.
``(c) Priority.--In selecting grant recipients under this
section, the Secretary shall give priority to States that
will use the grants for one or more high-need local
educational agencies and schools.
``(d) Terms of Grant.--A grant under this section--
``(1) shall be for not more than 5 years; and
``(2) shall be performance-based, permitting the Secretary
to discontinue funding based on failure of the State to meet
benchmarks identified by the State.
``(e) Use of Evaluation Results.--A State receiving a grant
under this section shall use the evaluation results of the
pilot program conducted pursuant to the grant and similar
evaluations of other in-State programs of principal
preparation (especially the correlation of academic
achievement gains in schools led by participating principals
and the characteristics and skills demonstrated by those
individuals when applying to and participating in the pilot
program) to inform the design of certification of individuals
to become school leaders in the State.
``(f) Definitions.--For the purposes of this section:
``(1) The term `exemplary, highly qualified principal' has
the meaning given to that term in section 2501.
``(2) The term `performance-based certification system'
means a certification system that--
``(A) is based on a clearly defined set of standards for
skills and knowledge needed by new principals;
``(B) is not based on numbers of hours enrolled in
particular courses;
``(C) certifies participating individuals to become school
leaders primarily based on--
``(i) their demonstration of those skills through a formal
assessment aligned to these standards; and
``(ii) academic achievement results in a school leadership
role such as a residency or an assistant principalship; and
``(D) awards certification to individuals who successfully
complete programs at institutions that include local
educational agencies, nonprofit organizations, and business
schools approved by the State for purposes of such
certification and have formalized partnerships with in-State
local educational agencies.
``(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this
section, there are authorized to be appropriated $100,000,000
for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be necessary for
each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.

``SEC. 2514. STUDY ON DEVELOPING A PORTABLE PERFORMANCE-BASED
TEACHER ASSESSMENT.

``(a) Study.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall enter into an
arrangement with an objective evaluation firm to conduct a
study to assess the validity of any test used for teacher
certification or licensure by multiple States, taking into
account the passing scores adopted by multiple States. The
study shall determine the following:
``(A) The extent to which tests of content knowledge
represent subject mastery at the baccalaureate level.
``(B) Whether tests of pedagogy reflect the latest research
on teaching and learning.
``(C) The relationship, if any, between teachers' scores on
licensure and certification exams and other measures of
teacher effectiveness, including learning gains achieved by
the teachers' students.
``(2) Report.--The Secretary shall submit a report to the
Congress on the results of the study conducted under this
subsection.
``(b) Grant to Create a Model Performance-based
Assessment.--
``(1) Grant.--The Secretary may make 1 grant to an eligible
partnership to create a model performance-based assessment of
teaching skills that reliably evaluates teaching skills in
practice and can be used to facilitate the portability of
teacher credentials and licensing from one State to another.
``(2) Consideration of study.--In creating a model
performance-based assessment of teaching skills, the
recipient of a grant under this section shall take into
consideration the results of the study conducted under
subsection (a).
``(3) Eligible partnership.--In this section, the term
`eligible partnership' means a partnership of--
``(A) an independent professional organization; and
``(B) an organization that represents administrators of
State educational agencies.''.

SEC. 302. AMENDMENT TO THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT OF 1965:
TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS.

Part A of title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 is
amended by striking sections 206 through 209 (20 U.S.C. 1026-
1029) and inserting the following:

``SEC. 206. ACCOUNTABILITY AND EVALUATION.

``(a) State Grant Accountability Report.--An eligible State
that receives a grant under section 202 shall submit an
annual accountability report to the Secretary, the Committee
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, and
the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives. Such report shall include a description of
the degree to which the eligible State, in using funds
provided under such section, has made substantial progress in
meeting the following goals:
``(1) Percentage of highly qualified teachers.--Increasing
the percentage of highly qualified teachers in the State as
required by section 1119 of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6319).
``(2) Student academic achievement.--Increasing student
academic achievement for all students, which may be measured
through the use of value-added assessments, as defined by the
eligible State.
``(3) Raising standards.--Raising the State academic
standards required to enter the teaching profession as a
highly qualified teacher.
``(4) Initial certification or licensure.--Increasing
success in the pass rate for initial State teacher
certification or licensure, or increasing the numbers of
qualified individuals being certified or licensed as teachers
through alternative routes to certification and licensure.
``(5) Decreasing teacher shortages.--Decreasing shortages
of highly qualified teachers in poor urban and rural areas.
``(6) Increasing opportunities for research-based
professional development.--Increasing opportunities for
enhanced and ongoing professional development that--
``(A) improves the academic content knowledge of teachers
in the subject areas in which the teachers are certified or
licensed to teach or in which the teachers are working toward
certification or licensure to teach; and
``(B) promotes strong teaching skills.
``(7) Technology integration.--Increasing the number of
teachers prepared effectively to integrate technology into
curricula and instruction and who use technology to collect,
manage, and analyze data to improve teaching, learning, and
parental involvement decisionmaking for the purpose of
increasing student academic achievement.
``(b) Eligible Partnership Evaluation.--Each eligible
partnership applying for a grant under section 203 shall
establish, and include in the application submitted under
section 203(c), an evaluation plan that includes strong
performance objectives. The plan shall include objectives and
measures for--
``(1) increased student achievement for all students, as
measured by the partnership;
``(2) increased teacher retention in the first 3 years of a
teacher's career;
``(3) increased success in the pass rate for initial State
certification or licensure of teachers;
``(4) increased percentage of highly qualified teachers;
and
``(5) increasing the number of teachers trained effectively
to integrate technology into curricula and instruction and
who use technology to collect, manage, and analyze data to
improve teaching, learning, and decisionmaking for the
purpose of improving student academic achievement.
``(c) Revocation of Grant.--
``(1) Report.--Each eligible State or eligible partnership
receiving a grant under section 202 or 203 shall report
annually on the progress of the eligible State or eligible
partnership toward meeting the purposes of this part and the
goals, objectives, and measures described in subsections (a)
and (b).
``(2) Revocation.--
``(A) Eligible states and eligible applicants.--If the
Secretary determines that an eligible State or eligible
applicant is not making substantial progress in meeting the
purposes, goals, objectives, and measures, as appropriate, by
the end of the second year of a grant under this part, then
the grant payment shall not be made for the third year of the
grant.
``(B) Eligible partnerships.--If the Secretary determines
that an eligible partnership is not making substantial
progress in meeting the purposes, goals, objectives, and
measures, as appropriate, by the end of the third year of a
grant under this part, then

[[Page S6329]]

the grant payments shall not be made for any succeeding year
of the grant.
``(d) Evaluation and Dissemination.--The Secretary shall
evaluate the activities funded under this part and report
annually the Secretary's findings regarding the activities to
the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of
the Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce
of the House of Representatives. The Secretary shall broadly
disseminate successful practices developed by eligible States
and eligible partnerships under this part, and shall broadly
disseminate information regarding such practices that were
found to be ineffective.

``SEC. 207. ACCOUNTABILITY FOR PROGRAMS THAT PREPARE
TEACHERS.

``(a) State Report Card on the Quality of Teacher and
Principal Preparation.--Each State that receives funds under
this Act shall provide to the Secretary annually, in a
uniform and comprehensible manner that conforms with the
definitions and methods established by the Secretary, a State
report card on the quality of teacher preparation in the
State, both for traditional certification or licensure
programs and for alternative certification or licensure
programs, which shall include at least the following:
``(1) A description of the teacher and principal
certification and licensure assessments, and any other
certification and licensure requirements, used by the State.
``(2) The standards and criteria that prospective teachers
and principals must meet in order to attain initial teacher
and principal certification or licensure and to be certified
or licensed to teach particular subjects or in particular
grades within the State.
``(3) A demonstration of the extent to which the
assessments and requirements described in paragraph (1) are
aligned with the State's standards and assessments for
students.
``(4) The percentage of students who have completed the
clinical coursework for a teacher preparation program at an
institution of higher education or alternative certification
program and who have taken and passed each of the assessments
used by the State for teacher certification and licensure,
and the passing score on each assessment that determines
whether a candidate has passed that assessment.
``(5) For students who have completed the clinical
coursework for a teacher preparation program at an
institution of higher education or alternative certification
program, and who have taken and passed each of the
assessments used by the State for teacher certification and
licensure, each such institution's and each such program's
average raw score, ranked by teacher preparation program,
which shall be made available widely and publicly.
``(6) A description of each State's alternative routes to
teacher certification, if any, and the number and percentage
of teachers certified through each alternative certification
route who pass State teacher certification or licensure
assessments.
``(7) For each State, a description of proposed criteria
for assessing the performance of teacher and principal
preparation programs in the State, including indicators of
teacher and principal candidate skills, placement, and
retention rates (to the extent feasible), and academic
content knowledge and evidence of gains in student academic
achievement.
``(8) For each teacher preparation program in the State,
the number of students in the program, the number of minority
students in the program, the average number of hours of
supervised practice teaching required for those in the
program, and the number of full-time equivalent faculty,
adjunct faculty, and students in supervised practice
teaching.
``(9) For the State as a whole, and for each teacher
preparation program in the State, the number of teachers
prepared, in the aggregate and reported separately by--
``(A) level (elementary or secondary);
``(B) academic major;
``(C) subject or subjects for which the student has been
prepared to teach; and
``(D) teacher candidates who speak a language other than
English and have been trained specifically to teach English-
language learners.
``(10) The State shall refer to the data generated for
paragraphs (8) and (9) to report on the extent to which
teacher preparation programs are helping to address shortages
of qualified teachers, by level, subject, and specialty, in
the State's public schools, especially in poor urban and
rural areas as required by section 206(a)(5).
``(b) Report of the Secretary on the Quality of Teacher
Preparation.--
``(1) Report card.--The Secretary shall provide to
Congress, and publish and make widely available, a report
card on teacher qualifications and preparation in the United
States, including all the information reported in paragraphs
(1) through (10) of subsection (a). Such report shall
identify States for which eligible States and eligible
partnerships received a grant under this part. Such report
shall be so provided, published and made available annually.
``(2) Report to congress.--The Secretary shall report to
Congress--
``(A) a comparison of States' efforts to improve teaching
quality; and
``(B) regarding the national mean and median scores on any
standardized test that is used in more than 1 State for
teacher certification or licensure.
``(3) Special rule.--In the case of programs with fewer
than 10 students who have completed the clinical coursework
for a teacher preparation program taking any single initial
teacher certification or licensure assessment during an
academic year, the Secretary shall collect and publish
information with respect to an average pass rate on State
certification or licensure assessments taken over a 3-year
period.
``(c) Coordination.--The Secretary, to the extent
practicable, shall coordinate the information collected and
published under this part among States for individuals who
took State teacher certification or licensure assessments in
a State other than the State in which the individual received
the individual's most recent degree.
``(d) Institution and Program Report Cards on Quality of
Teacher Preparation.--
``(1) Report card.--Each institution of higher education or
alternative certification program that conducts a teacher
preparation program that enrolls students receiving Federal
assistance under this Act shall report annually to the State
and the general public, in a uniform and comprehensible
manner that conforms with the definitions and methods
established by the Secretary, both for traditional
certification or licensure programs and for alternative
certification or licensure programs, the following
information, disaggregated by major racial and ethnic groups:
``(A) Pass rate.--(i) For the most recent year for which
the information is available, the pass rate of each student
who has completed the clinical coursework for the teacher
preparation program on the teacher certification or licensure
assessments of the State in which the institution is located,
but only for those students who took those assessments within
3 years of receiving a degree from the institution or
completing the program.
``(ii) A comparison of the institution or program's pass
rate for students who have completed the clinical coursework
for the teacher preparation program with the average pass
rate for institutions and programs in the State.
``(iii) In the case of programs with fewer than 10 students
who have completed the clinical coursework for a teacher
preparation program taking any single initial teacher
certification or licensure assessment during an academic
year, the institution shall collect and publish information
with respect to an average pass rate on State certification
or licensure assessments taken over a 3-year period.
``(B) Program information.--The number of students in the
program, the average number of hours of supervised practice
teaching required for those in the program, and the number of
full-time equivalent faculty and students in supervised
practice teaching.
``(C) Statement.--In States that require approval or
accreditation of teacher education programs, a statement of
whether the institution's program is so approved or
accredited, and by whom.
``(D) Designation as low-performing.--Whether the program
has been designated as low-performing by the State under
section 208(a).
``(2) Requirement.--The information described in paragraph
(1) shall be reported through publications such as school
catalogs and promotional materials sent to potential
applicants, secondary school guidance counselors, and
prospective employers of the institution's program graduates,
including materials sent by electronic means.
``(3) Fines.--In addition to the actions authorized in
section 487(c), the Secretary may impose a fine not to exceed
$25,000 on an institution of higher education for failure to
provide the information described in this subsection in a
timely or accurate manner.
``(e) Data Quality.--Either--
``(1) the Governor of the State; or
``(2) in the case of a State for which the constitution or
law of such State designates another individual, entity, or
agency in the State to be responsible for teacher
certification and preparation activity, such individual,
entity, or agency;

shall attest annually, in writing, as to the reliability,
validity, integrity, and accuracy of the data submitted
pursuant to this section.

``SEC. 208. STATE FUNCTIONS.

``(a) State Assessment.--In order to receive funds under
this Act, a State shall have in place a procedure to identify
and assist, through the provision of technical assistance,
low-performing programs of teacher preparation within
institutions of higher education. Such State shall provide
the Secretary an annual list of such low-performing
institutions that includes an identification of those
institutions at risk of being placed on such list. Such
levels of performance shall be determined solely by the State
and may include criteria based upon information collected
pursuant to this part. Such assessment shall be described in
the report under section 207(a). A State receiving Federal
funds under this title shall develop plans to close or
reconstitute underperforming programs of teacher preparation
within institutions of higher education.
``(b) Termination of Eligibility.--Any institution of
higher education that offers a program of teacher preparation
in which the State has withdrawn the State's approval or
terminated the State's financial support due to the low
performance of the institution's teacher preparation program
based upon the

[[Page S6330]]

State assessment described in subsection (a)--
``(1) shall be ineligible for any funding for professional
development activities awarded by the Department of
Education; and
``(2) shall not be permitted to accept or enroll any
student who receives aid under title IV of this Act in the
institution's teacher preparation program.

``SEC. 209. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

``In complying with sections 207 and 208, the Secretary
shall ensure that States and institutions of higher education
use fair and equitable methods in reporting and that the
reporting methods do not allow identification of
individuals.''.

SEC. 303. ENFORCING NCLB'S TEACHER EQUITY PROVISION.

Subpart 2 of part E of title IX of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7901 et seq.) is
amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 9537. ASSURANCE OF REASONABLE PROGRESS TOWARD
EQUITABLE ACCESS TO TEACHER QUALITY.

``(a) In General.--The Secretary may not provide any
assistance to a State under this Act unless, in the State's
application for such assistance, the State--
``(1) provides the plan required by section 1111(b)(8)(C)
and at least one public report pursuant to that section;
``(2) clearly articulates the measures the State is using
to determine whether poor and minority students are being
taught disproportionately by inexperienced, unqualified, or
out-of-field teachers;
``(3) includes an evaluation of the success of the State's
plan required by section 1111(b)(8)(C) in addressing any such
disparities;
``(4) with respect to any such disparities, proposes
modifications to such plan; and
``(5) includes a description of the State's activities to
monitor the compliance of local educational agencies in the
State with section 1112(c)(1)(L).
``(b) Effective Date.--This section applies with respect to
any assistance under this Act for which an application is
submitted after the date of the enactment of this section.''.

TITLE IV--EQUIPPING TEACHERS, SCHOOLS, LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES, AND
STATES WITH THE 21ST CENTURY DATA, TOOLS, AND ASSESSMENTS THEY NEED

SEC. 401. 21ST CENTURY DATA, TOOLS, AND ASSESSMENTS.

Part E of title II of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as added by titles II and III of this
Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Subpart 3--21st Century Data, Tools, and Assessments

``SEC. 2521. DEVELOPING VALUE-ADDED DATA SYSTEMS.

``(a) Teacher and Principal Evaluation.--
``(1) Grants.--The Secretary shall make grants to States to
develop and implement statewide data systems to collect and
analyze data on the effectiveness of elementary school and
secondary school teachers and principals, based on value-
added student achievement gains, for the purposes of--
``(A) determining the distribution of effective teachers
and principals in schools across the State;
``(B) developing measures for helping teachers and
principals to improve their instruction; and
``(C) evaluating effectiveness of teacher and principal
preparation programs.
``(2) Data requirements.--At a minimum, a statewide data
system under this section shall--
``(A) track student course-taking patterns and teacher
characteristics, such as certification status and performance
on licensure exams; and
``(B) allow for the analysis of gains in achievement made
by individual students over time, including gains
demonstrated through student academic assessments under
section 1111 and tests required by the State for course
completion.
``(3) Standards.--The Secretary shall develop standards for
the collection of data with grant funds under this section to
ensure that such data are statistically valid and reliable.
``(4) Application.--To seek a grant under this section, a
State shall submit an application at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may
require. At a minimum, each such application shall
demonstrate to the Secretary's satisfaction that the
assessments used by the State to collect and analyze data for
purposes of this subsection--
``(A) are aligned to State standards;
``(B) have the capacity to assess the highest- and lowest-
performing students; and
``(C) are statistically valid and reliable.
``(b) Teacher Training.--The Secretary may make grants to
institutions of higher education, local educational agencies,
nonprofit organizations, and teacher organizations to develop
and implement innovative programs to provide preservice and
in-service training to elementary and secondary schools on--
``(1) understanding increasingly sophisticated student
achievement data, especially data derived from value-added
longitudinal data systems; and
``(2) using such data to improve classroom instruction.
``(c) Study.--The Secretary shall enter into an agreement
with the National Academy of Sciences--
``(1) to evaluate the quality of data on the effectiveness
of elementary and secondary school teachers, based on value-
added student achievement gains; and
``(2) to compare a range of models for collecting and
analyzing such data.
``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this
section, there are authorized to be appropriated $200,000,000
for the period of fiscal years 2006 and 2007 and such sums as
may be necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal
years.''.

SEC. 402. COLLECTING NATIONAL DATA ON DISTRIBUTION OF
TEACHERS.

Section 155 of the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002
(20 U.S.C. 9545) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(d) Schools and Staffing Survey.--Not later than the end
of fiscal year 2006, and every 3 years thereafter, the
Statistics Commissioner shall publish the results of the
Schools and Staffing Survey (or any successor survey).''.

TITLE V--RETENTION: KEEPING OUR BEST TEACHERS IN THE CLASSROOM

SEC. 501. AMENDMENT TO ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT
OF 1965.

Part E of title II of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965, as added by titles II, III, and IV of
this Act, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``Subpart 4--Retention and Working Conditions

``SEC. 2531. IMPROVING PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITIES.

``(a) Grants.--The Secretary may make grants to eligible
entities for the establishment and operation of new teacher
centers or the support of existing teacher centers.
``(b) Special Consideration.--In making grants under this
section, the Secretary shall give special consideration to
any application submitted by an eligible entity that is--
``(1) a high-need local educational agency; or
``(2) a consortium that includes at least one high-need
local educational agency.
``(c) Duration.--Each grant under this section shall be for
a period of 3 years.
``(d) Required Activities.--A teacher center receiving
assistance under this section shall carry out each of the
following activities:
``(1) Providing high-quality professional development to
teachers to assist them in improving their knowledge, skills,
and teaching practices in order to help students to improve
their achievement and meet State academic standards.
``(2) Providing teachers with information on developments
in curricula, assessments, and educational research,
including the manner in which the research and data can be
used to improve teaching skills and practice.
``(3) Providing training and support for new teachers.
``(e) Permissible Activities.--A teacher center may use
assistance under this section for any of the following:
``(1) Assessing the professional development needs of the
teachers and other instructional school employees, such as
librarians, counselors, and paraprofessionals, to be served
by the center.
``(2) Providing intensive support to staff to improve
instruction in literacy, mathematics, science, and other
curricular areas necessary to provide a well-rounded
education to students.
``(3) Providing support to mentors working with new
teachers.
``(4) Providing training in effective instructional
services and classroom management strategies for mainstream
teachers serving students with disabilities and students with
limited English proficiency.
``(5) Enabling teachers to engage in study groups and other
collaborative activities and collegial interactions regarding
instruction.
``(6) Paying for release time and substitute teachers in
order to enable teachers to participate in the activities of
the teacher center.
``(7) Creating libraries of professional materials and
educational technology.
``(8) Providing high-quality professional development for
other instructional staff, such as paraprofessionals,
librarians, and counselors.
``(9) Assisting teachers to become highly qualified and
paraprofessionals to become teachers.
``(10) Assisting paraprofessionals to meet the requirements
of section 1119.
``(11) Developing curricula.
``(12) Incorporating additional on-line professional
development resources for participants.
``(13) Providing funding for individual- or group-initiated
classroom projects.
``(14) Developing partnerships with businesses and
community-based organizations.
``(15) Establishing a teacher center site.
``(f) Teacher Center Policy Board.--
``(1) In general.--A teacher center receiving assistance
under this section shall be operated under the supervision of
a teacher center policy board.
``(2) Membership.--
``(A) Teacher representatives.--The majority of the members
of a teacher center policy board shall be representatives of,
and selected by, the elementary and secondary school teachers
to be served by the teacher center. Such representatives
shall be selected through the teacher organization, or if
there is no teacher organization, by the teachers directly.
``(B) Other representatives.--The members of a teacher
center policy board--

[[Page S6331]]

``(i) shall include at least two members who are
representative of, or designated by, the school board of the
local educational agency to be served by the teacher center;
``(ii) shall include at least one member who is a
representative of, and is designated by, the institutions of
higher education (with departments or schools of education)
located in the area; and
``(iii) may include paraprofessionals.
``(g) Application.--
``(1) In general.--To seek a grant under this section, an
eligible entity shall submit an application at such time, in
such manner, and accompanied by such information as the
Secretary may reasonably require.
``(2) Assurance of compliance.--An application under
paragraph (1) shall include an assurance that the applicant
will require any teacher center receiving assistance through
the grant to comply with the requirements of this section.
``(3) Teacher center policy board.--An application under
paragraph (1) shall include the following:
``(A) An assurance that--
``(i) the applicant has established a teacher center policy
board;
``(ii) the board participated fully in the preparation of
the application; and
``(iii) the board approved the application as submitted.
``(B) A description of the membership of the board and the
method of its selection.
``(h) Definitions.--In this section:
``(1) The term `eligible entity' means a local educational
agency or a consortium of 2 or more local educational
agencies.
``(2) The term `teacher center policy board' means a
teacher center policy board described in subsection (f).
``(i) Authorization of Appropriations.--To carry out this
section, there are authorized to be appropriated $100,000,000
for fiscal year 2006 and such sums as may be necessary for
each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.''.

SEC. 502. EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME OF COMPENSATION OF
TEACHERS AND PRINCIPALS IN CERTAIN HIGH-NEED
SCHOOLS OR TEACHING HIGH-NEED SUBJECTS.

(a) In General.--Part III of subchapter B of chapter 1 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by inserting
after section 139A the following new section:

``SEC. 139B. COMPENSATION OF CERTAIN TEACHERS AND PRINCIPALS.

``(a) Teachers and Principals in High-need Schools.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of an individual employed as
a teacher or principal in a high-need school during the
taxable year, gross income does not include so much
remuneration for such employment (which would but for this
paragraph be includible in gross income) as does not exceed
$15,000.
``(2) High-need school.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `high-need school' means any public elementary
school or public secondary school eligible for assistance
under section 1114 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6314).
``(b) Teachers of High-need Subjects.--
``(1) In general.--In the case of an individual employed as
a teacher of high-need subjects during the taxable year,
gross income does not include so much remuneration for such
employment (which would but for this paragraph be includible
in gross income) as does not exceed $15,000.
``(2) Teacher of high-need subjects.--For purposes of this
subsection, the term `teacher of high-need subjects' means
any teacher in a public elementary or secondary school who--
``(A) (i) teaches primarily 1 or more high-need subjects in
1 or more grades 9 through 12, or
``(ii) teaches 1 or more high-need subjects in 1 or more
grades kindergarten through 8,
``(B) received a baccalaureate or similar degree from an
eligible educational institution (as defined in section
25A(f)(2)) with a major in a high-need subject, and
``(C) is highly qualified (as defined in section 9101(23)
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965).
``(3) High-need subjects.--For purposes of this subsection,
the term `high-need subject' means mathematics, science,
engineering, technology, special education, teaching English
language learners, or any other subject identified as a high-
need subject by the Secretary of Education for purposes of
this section.
``(c) Limitation on Total Remuneration Taken Into
Account.--In the case of any individual whose employment is
described in subsections (a)(1) and (b)(1), the total amount
of remuneration which may be taken into account with respect
to such employment under this section for the taxable year
shall not exceed $25,000.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of section of such part
is amended by inserting after the item relating to section
139A the following new item:

``Sec. 139B. Compensation of certain teachers and principals''.

(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to remuneration received in taxable years
beginning after the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 503. ABOVE-THE-LINE DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN EXPENSES OF
ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS
INCREASED AND MADE PERMANENT.

(a) In General.--Subparagraph (D) of section 62(a)(2) of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``In
the case of'' and all that follows through ``$250'' and
inserting ``The deductions allowed by section 162 which
consist of expenses, not in excess of $500''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after the date of the
enactment of this Act.

TITLE VI--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

SEC. 601. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

The table of contents at section 2 of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) is
amended--
(1) by inserting after the items relating to part D of
title II of such Act the following new items:

``Part E--Teacher Excellence for All Children

``Sec. 2500. Definitions.

``Subpart 1--Distribution

``Sec. 2501. Premium pay; loan repayment.
``Sec. 2502. Career ladders for teachers program.

``Subpart 2--Preparation

``Sec. 2511. Establishing state-of-the-art teacher induction programs.
``Sec. 2512. Peer mentoring and review programs.
``Sec. 2513. Establishing state-of-the-art principal training and
induction programs and performance-based principal
certification.
``Sec. 2514. Study on developing a portable performance-based teacher
assessment.

``Subpart 3--21st Century Data, Tools, and Assessments

``Sec. 2521. Developing value-added data systems.

``Subpart 4--Retention and Working Conditions

``Sec. 2531. Improving professional development opportunities.''; and

(2) by inserting after the items relating to subpart 2 of
part E of title IX of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 the following new item:

``Sec. 9537. Assurance of reasonable progress toward equitable access
to teacher quality.''.
______

By Mr. BURNS:
S. 1219. A bill to authorize certain tribes in the State of Montana
to enter into a lease or other temporary conveyance of water rights to
meet the water needs of the Dry Prairie Rural Water Association, Inc;
to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
provides an important clarification to the Fort Peck Reservation Rural
Water System Act of 2000. The water project authorized by that
legislation will provide desperately needed drinking water to the
residents of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and the communities
surrounding the Reservation Dry Prairie Rural Water System.
In order to accomplish this, the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the
Fort Peck Reservation and Dry Prairie are set to enter into an
agreement, allowing Dry Prairie to use the water. The Dry Prairie
allocation will be approximately 2,800 acre feet of water. The
agreement is consistent with the provisions of the Tribes' Water
Compact. However, to address any possible questions regarding the
Tribes' grant of use of this water to Dry Prairie, both the Tribes and
Dry Prairie would like the Secretary's authority to approve this water
use agreement to be clearly approved by Congress. The legislation I am
introducing today provides this clarification.
The Project, as authorized, calls for the water to be diverted from
the Missouri River at a single location south of Poplar, MT, to an
intake system or an infiltration gallery. The estimated amount of
annual project diversion is 6,000 acre feet for the entire Project
area. The Missouri River at the point of diversion has an average
annual streamflow of approximately 7.5 million acre feet.
The Tribes, pursuant to their tribal-state water rights compact, one
of the first in the Nation, hold a water right to nearly one million
acre feet in the Missouri River. This compact has been approved by the
Montana Water Court and is binding on all the parties. This Project
will finally enable the Fort Peck Tribes to receive critical benefits
from its water settlement with the United States and the State of
Montana. As a result of this settlement, the Tribes are able to make a
significant contribution to the Project: the water that will be used
for the entire system. My legislation will provide the legal clarity
necessary to ensure this project moves forward as intended.
______

By Mr. DODD (for himself, Ms. Collins, and Mr. Leahy):
S. 1220. A bill to assist law enforcement in their efforts to recover
missing

[[Page S6332]]

children and to strengthen the standards for State sex offender
registration programs; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am pleased to join with my colleague from
Maine, Senator Collins, and my colleague from Vermont, Senator Leahy,
to introduce legislation today to protect America's children from the
vicious criminals who prey on them.
While we've made some progress in the last few years, anyone who
picks up a newspaper today can see that far too many of our kids are
still too vulnerable.
The most recent annual data shows that about 58,000 children were
abducted by nonfamily members, usually people who are strangers to the
children. The most frequent victims were teenage girls. Almost one-half
of these victims were sexually molested.
Our bill, ``The Prevention and Recovery of Missing Children Act of
2005'', will take 3 common-sense steps to better protect the children
of America.
First, it will require that information on a missing child be
disseminated throughout the country within 2 hours through the National
Crime Information Center database. The reason for this requirement is
that time is of the essence. In cases where a child is killed, the
evidence shows that the child died within the first three hours of
being kidnapped. The more quickly that police throughout the country
can be alerted, the more likely it is that we can save a child before a
child is harmed.
Second, the bill will make it tougher for convicted sex offenders to
escape the law and the watchful eye of the community in which they
live. We know that far too many jurisdictions rely essentially on the
voluntary actions of the convicted sex offender to register his
residence, his car and license plate, and other pertinent information.
Moreover, requirements vary from state to state and jurisdiction to
jurisdiction.
Therefore the legislation we are introducing today will provide tough
national standards that will require these criminals to register before
they are released from prison. It will require, within 48 hours of
moving to a new residence, that these individuals report to local law
enforcement and provide information about their residence, a current
photograph, DNA sample, as well as report the make, model, and license
plate number of his or her vehicle and get a drivers license or ID.
Every 90 days, they would have to verify their registry information and
annually provide a new photograph. Failure to comply with these
requirements would subject the criminal to a felony.
These new requirements are tough, but our children's safety is far
too important to be left to patchwork laws and the voluntary action of
convicted criminals whose likelihood of repeating the crime is
extremely high.
Third, the legislation removes a current requirement that the names
of missing children be deleted from the national database when those
children turn 18. Just because a child turns 18 doesn't mean that our
country should not try to find that child and certainly doesn't mean
that the child should be forgotten.
Nothing we do as a Nation is more important than building a better
future for our children. And, nothing is more important to building
that future than keeping our children safe today.
Therefore, in my view, no legislation is more important to be enacted
in this Congress than this legislation to protect our children from
every parent's nightmare. I ask unanimous consent to have a brief
summary of the bill printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record as follows:

Prevention and Recovery of Missing Children Act of 2005--Brief Summary

The most recent annual data shows that 58,000 children were
abducted by nonfamily members, mostly strangers to the
children. Most of the victims were teenage girls and nearly
half were sexually molested. The National Crime Information
Center (NCIC) database is a critical means of cooperation,
linking 16,000 Federal, State, and local law enforcement
agencies. Currently, registration for convicted sex offender
rules vary by state. A number of States rely on sex offenders
to self-report.
Improves missing child reporting requirements. Stops the
practice of removing a missing child entry from the NCIC
database when the child reaches age 18, to increase the
chances for child recovery and investigative information
available for other cases.
Improves the chances for recovery of missing children.
Requires entry of child information into the NCIC database
within 2 hours of receipt. Immediate entry is critical as
evidenced by the fact that in 74 percent of abduction
homicide cases the child is dead within 3 hours and 91
percent are killed within 24 hours.
Strengthens sex offender registration requirements. Each of
the following suggested amendments are currently part of the
statutory sex offender registration policies and procedures
in at least one or more states.
Requires States to register sex offenders before they are
released from prison. Permitting sex offenders to self-
register can lead to under-registration and loss of
potentially vital investigative information for law
enforcement.
Requires the registering agency to obtain current
fingerprints and a photograph (annually), as well as a DNA
sample, from an offender at the time of registration. Up-to-
date identifying information is a vital investigative tool
and may help law enforcement connect seemingly unrelated
cases in different jurisdictions.
Requires registrants to obtain either a driver's license or
an identification card from the department of motor vehicles.
This provides another mechanism through which law enforcement
can track the location of potential re-offenders.
Requires that registration changes occur within 48 hours of
the changes taking effect. The delay of registering changes
creates a ``loophole'' through which sex offenders can re-
offend and remain undetected.
Requires all registered sex offenders to verify their
registry information every 90 days. Currently, this
requirement is imposed for sexually violent predators only.
Obtaining up-to-date registry information from all sex
offenders is a vital investigative tool for law enforcement
and obtaining it every 90 days provides earlier warning to
law enforcement of non-compliant offenders who may have
traveled into other jurisdictions, placing new communities at
risk.
Requires States to inform another state when a known
registered person is moving into its jurisdiction. Placing
this burden solely on the sex offender leads to under-
registration and places communities at risk.
In order to give sex offenders a strong incentive to comply
with registry requirements, the bill mandates a felony
designation for the crime of non-compliance. Non-compliance
must be viewed as an ongoing offense.
______

By Mr. STEVENS (for himself, Mr. Inouye, and Ms. Cantwell):
S. 1222. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to
reinstate the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund tax and to maintain a
balance of $3 billion in the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I introduce legislation today to maintain
the solvency of the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund established pursuant
to the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. Shortly after midnight on March 24,
1989 the Exxon Valdez went aground on Bligh reef and caused an oil
spill in Prince William Sound that is to this day still being
monitored, studied, and restored. I wrote the Oil Pollution Act of 1990
in the aftermath of this disaster to provide the needed regulatory
safeguards to reduce the potential for a similar spill to happen again
and mitigate the environmental impacts in such an instance. The Oil
Spill Liability Trust Fund is the cornerstone of the Oil Pollution Act
ensuring funds for expeditious oil removal and providing for
uncompensated damages to the environment. It is the ``polluter pays''
policy under the Act that requires the responsible party to pay back
into the Fund all costs and damages related to a spill.
Unfortunately, the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund is rapidly running
out of money. At a recent Commerce Committee hearing the Commandant of
the Coast Guard testified that the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund would
likely be depleted by 2009. And in its report on the ``Implementation
of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990'', released May 12, 2005, the Coast
Guard announced at the end of fiscal year 2004 there was $842 million
remaining in the Fund. This is compared to previous years when the un-
obligated balance was well over $1 billion, as was required under the
Act through a 5 cents per barrel of oil tax collected from the oil
industry on petroleum produced in or imported to the United States. The
tax was suspended on July 1, 1993 when the un-obligated balance in the
Fund exceeded $1 billion. Thereafter, the tax was reinstated on July 1,
1994 when the balance declined below $1 billion. However, the tax
expired on December 31, 1994 pursuant to the sunset provision under the
Act.

[[Page S6333]]

Since this time, the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund has been unable
to maintain a funding level above $1 billion from its various revenue
sources prescribed under the Act, which consist of transfers from other
existing pollution funds, interest on the Fund principal from U.S.
Treasury investments, cost recoveries from responsible parties, and
penalties. The only viable option to maintain the Fund's solvency is
the reinstatement of the 5 cents per barrel of oil tax. The bill I
introduce today will require the 5 cents tax go into effect after the
last day of the first calendar quarter ending more than 30 days after
the date of enactment. In addition, the bill provides that the Oil
Spill Liabillty Trust Fund be funded at $3 billion, and if the fund
drops below $2 billion the 5 cents per barrel tax will automatically be
reinstated until the fund exceeds $3 billion.
______

By Mr. DODD:
S. 1223. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to improve the
quality and efficiency of health care delivery through improvements in
health care information technology, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, today I am pleased to announce the
reintroduction of the Information Technology for Health Care Quality
Act. By encouraging health care providers to invest in information
technology (IT), this legislation has the potential to bring
skyrocketing health care costs under control and improve the overall
quality of care in our nation.
We are facing a health care crisis in our country. According to the
Census Bureau, 45 million Americans were without health insurance in
2003--an increase of 1.4 million over 2002. In many respects, we have
the greatest health system in the world, but far too many Americans are
unable to take advantage of this system.
The number of uninsured continues to rise because the cost of health
care continues to soar. Year after year, health care costs increase by
double-digit percentages. The cost of employer-sponsored coverage
increased by 11 percent last year, after a 14-percent increase in 2003.
Employers are dropping health care coverage because they can no longer
afford to foot the bill.
One of the ways to provide health care coverage to every American is
to reign in health care costs. And expanding the use of IT in health
care is the best tool we have to control costs. Studies have shown that
as much as one-third of health care spending is for redundant or
inappropriate care. Estimates suggest that up to 14 percent of
laboratory tests and 11 percent of medication usage are unnecessary.
Finally, and perhaps most disturbingly, we know that it takes, on
average, 17 years for evidence to be incorporated into clinical
practice. Along these same lines, a recent study showed that patients
receive the best evidence-based treatment only about half the time.
Significant cost-savings will undoubtedly be realized simply by
moving away from a paper-based system, where patient charts and test
results are easily lost or misplaced, to an electronic system where
data is easily stored, transferred from location to location, and
retrieved at any time. With health IT, physicians will have their
patients' medical information, at their fingertips. A physician will no
longer have to take another set of X-Rays because the first set was
misplaced, or order a test that the patient had six months ago in
another hospital because she is unaware that the test ever took place.
The potential for cost-savings from simply eliminating redundancies and
unnecessary tests, and reducing administrative and transaction costs,
is substantial.
Of course, when we consider the improved quality of care and patient
safety that will result from wider adoption of health IT, the impact on
cost is even greater. For example, IT can provide decision support to
ensure that physicians are aware of the most up-to-date, evidence-based
best practices regarding a specific disease or condition, which will
reduce expensive hospitalizations. Given all of these benefits,
estimates suggest that Electrontc Health Records (EHRs) alone could
save more than $100 billion each year. The full benefits of IT could be
multiple hundreds of billions annually. Such a significant reduction in
health care costs would allow us to provide coverage to millions of
uninsured Americans.

The benefits of IT go beyond economics. I am sure that all of my
colleagues are familiar with the Institute of Medicine (IOM) estimate
that up to 98,000 Americans die each year as a result of medical
errors. A RAND Corporation study from last year showed that, on
average, patients receive the recommended care for certain widespread
chronic conditions only half of the time. That is an astonishing
figure. To put it in a slightly different way, for many of the health
conditions with which physicians should be most familiar, half of all
patients are essentially being treated incorrectly.
Most experts in the field of patient safety and health care quality,
incuding the IOM, agree that improving IT is one of the crucial steps
towards safer and better health care. By providing physicians with
access to patients' complete medical history, as well as electronic
cues to help them make the correct treatment decisions, IT has the
potential to significantly impact the care that Americans receive. It
is impossible to put a value on the potential savings in human lives
that would undoubtedly result from a nationwide investment in health
care information technology.
It might seem counterintuitive that we can realize tremendous cost
savings while, at the same time, improving care for patients. But in
fact, improving patient care is essential to reducing costs. IT is the
key to unlocking the door--it has the potential to lead to improvements
in care and efficiency that will save patients' lives, reduce costs,
and reduce the number of uninsured.
Unfortunately, despite the impact that IT can have on cost,
efficiency, patient safety, and health care quality, most health care
providers have not yet begun to invest in new technologies. The use of
IT in most hospitals and doctors' offices lags far behind almost every
other sphere of society. The vast majority of written work, such as
patient charts and prescriptions, is still done using pen and paper.
This leads to mistakes, higher costs, reduced quality of care, and in
the most tragic cases, death.
There is no question in my mind that the federal government has a
significant role to play in expanding investment in health IT. The
legislation that I am introducing today defines that role. First, this
bill would establish federal leadership in defining a Nationai Health
Information Infrastructure (NHII) and adopting health IT standards.
While I am pleased that the administration has already appointed a
National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, I believe that
the authority given to the Coordinator and the resources at his
disposal are not equal to the enormity of his task. That is why my
legislation creates an office in the White House, the Office of Health
Information Technology, to oversee all of the Federal Government's
activities in the area of health IT, and to create and implement a
national strategy to expand the adoption of IT in health care.
This office would also be responsible for leading a collaborative
effort between the public and private sectors to develop technical
standards for health IT. These standards will ensure that health care
information can be shared between providers, so that a family moving
from Connecticut to California will not have to leave their medical
history behind. At the same time, this bill would ensure that the
adopted standards protect the privacy of patient records. While the
creation of portable electronic health records is an important goal,
privacy and confidentiality must not be sacrificed.
This legislation would also provide financial assistance to
individual health care providers to stimulate investment in IT, and to
communities to help them set up interoperable IT infrastructures at the
local level, often referred to as Local Health Information
Infrastructures--LHIIs. IT requires a huge capital investment. Many
providers, especially small doctors offices, and safety-net and rural
hospitals and health centers, simply cannot afford to make the type of
investment that is needed.
Finally, this legislation would provide for the development of a
standard

[[Page S6334]]

set of health care quality measures. The creation of these measures is
critical to better understanding how our health care system is
performing, and where we need to focus our efforts to improve the
quality of care. IT has the potential to drastically improve our
ability to capture these quality measures. All recipients of Federal
funding under this bill would be required to regularly report on these
measures, as well as the impact that IT is having on health care
quality, efficency, and cost savings.
The establishment of standard quality measures is also the first step
in moving our nation towards a system where payment for health care is
more appropriately aligned--a system in which health care providers are
paid not simply for the volume of patients that they treat, but for the
quality of care that they deliver. To this end, my legislation would
require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to report to
Congress on possible changes to Federal reimbursement and payment
structures that would encourage the adoption of IT to improve health
care quality and patient safety.
I know that many of my colleagues, including Senator Enzi, Senator
Kennedy, Senator Clinton, Senator Frist and Senator Gregg, have an
interest in this issue. I look forward to working with all of them to
move legislation this year. It is time for our country to make a
concerted effort to bring the health care sector into the 21st century.
We must invest in health IT systems, and we must begin to do so
immediately. The number uninsured, the skyrocketing cost of care, and
the number of medical errors should all serve as a wake-up call. We
have a tool at our disposal to address all of these problems, and there
is no more time to waste. I urge my colleagues to support this
legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:

S. 1223

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 ``Information Technology for
Health Care Quality Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT.

The Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is
amended by adding at the end thereof the following:

``TITLE XXIX--HEALTH CARE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

``SEC. 2901. DEFINITIONS.

``In this title:
``(1) Coverage area.--The term `coverage area' means the
boundaries of a local health information infrastructure.
``(2) Director.--The term `Director' means the Director of
the Office of Health Information Technology.
``(3) Health care provider.--The term `health care
provider' means a hospital, skilled nursing facility, home
health entity, health care clinic, community health center,
group practice (as defined in section 1877(h)(4) of the
Social Security Act, including practices with only 1
physician), and any other facility or clinician determined
appropriate by the Director.
``(4) Health information technology.--The term `health
information technology' means a computerized system that--
``(A) is consistent with the standards developed pursuant
to section 2903;
``(B) permits the secure electronic transmission of
information to other health care providers and public health
entities; and
``(C) includes--
``(i) an electronic health record (EHR) that provides
access in real-time to the patient's complete medical record;
``(ii) a personal health record (PHR) through which an
individual (and anyone authorized by such individual) can
maintain and manage their health information;
``(iii) computerized provider order entry (CPOE) technology
that permits the electronic ordering of diagnostic and
treatment services, including prescription drugs;
``(iv) decision support to assist physicians in making
clinical decisions by providing electronic alerts and
reminders to improve compliance with best practices, promote
regular screenings and other preventive practices, and
facilitate diagnoses and treatments;
``(v) error notification procedures so that a warning is
generated if an order is entered that is likely to lead to a
significant adverse outcome for the patient; and
``(vi) tools to allow for the collection, analysis, and
reporting of data on adverse events, near misses, and the
quality of care provided to the patient.
``(5) Local health information infrastructures.--The term
`local health information infrastructure' means an
independent organization of health care entities established
for the purpose of linking health information systems to
electronically share information. A local health information
infrastructure may not be a single business entity.
``(6) Office.--The term `Office' means the Office of Health
Information Technology established under section 2902.

``SEC. 2902. OFFICE OF HEALTH INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

``(a) Establishment.--There is established within the
executive office of the President an Office of Health
Information Technology. The Office shall be headed by a
Director to be appointed by the President. The Director shall
report directly to the President.
``(b) Purpose.--It shall be the purpose of the Office to--
``(1) improve the quality and increase the efficiency of
health care delivery through the use of health information
technology;
``(2) provide national leadership relating to, and
encourage the adoption of, health information technology;
``(3) direct all health information technology activities
within the Federal Government; and
``(4) facilitate the interaction between the Federal
Government and the private sector relating to health
information technology development and use.
``(c) Duties and Responsibilities.--The Office shall be
responsible for the following:
``(1) National strategy.--The Office shall develop a
national strategy for improving the quality and enhancing the
efficiency of health care through the improved use of health
information technology and the creation of a National Health
Information Infrastructure.
``(2) Federal leadership.--The Office shall--
``(A) serve as the principle advisor to the President
concerning health information technology;
``(B) direct all health information technology activity
within the Federal Government, including approving or
disapproving agency policies submitted under paragraph (3);
``(C) work with public and private health information
technology stakeholders to implement the national strategy
described in paragraph (1); and
``(D) ensure that health information technology is utilized
as fully as practicable in carrying out health surveillance
efforts.
``(3) Agency policies.--
``(A) In general.--The Office shall, in accordance with
this paragraph, approve or disapprove the policies of Federal
departments or agencies with respect to any policy proposed
to be implemented by such agency or department that would
significantly affect that agency or department's use of
health information technology.
``(B) Submission of proposal.--The head of any Federal
Government agency or department that desires to implement any
policy with respect to such agency or department that would
significantly affect that agency or department's use of
health information technology shall submit an implementation
proposal to the Office at least 60 days prior to the proposed
date of the implementation of such policy.
``(C) Approval or disapproval.--Not later than 60 days
after the date on which a proposal is received under
subparagraph (B), the Office shall determine whether to
approve the implementation of such proposal. In making such
determination, the Office shall consider whether the proposal
is consistent with the national strategy described in
paragraph (1). If the Office fails to make a determination
within such 60-day period, such proposal shall be deemed to
be approved.
``(D) Failure to approve.--Except as otherwise provided for
by law, a proposal submitted under subparagraph (B) may not
be implemented unless such proposal is approved or deemed to
be approved under subparagraph (C).
``(4) Coordination.--The Office shall--
``(A) encourage the development and adoption of clinical,
messaging, and decision support health information data
standards, pursuant to the requirements of section 2903;
``(B) ensure the maintenance and implementation of the data
standards described in subparagraph (A);
``(C) oversee and coordinate the health information
technology efforts of the Federal Government;
``(D) ensure the compliance of the Federal Government with
Federally adopted health information technology data
standards;
``(E) ensure that the Federal Government consults and
collaborates on decision making with respect to health
information technology with the private sector and other
interested parties; and
``(F) in consultation with private sector, adopt
certification and testing criteria to determine if electronic
health information systems interoperate.
``(5) Communication.--The Office shall--
``(A) act as the point of contact for the private sector
with respect to the use of health information technology; and
``(B) work with the private sector to collect and
disseminate best health information technology practices.
``(6) Evaluation and dissemination.--The Office shall
coordinate with the Agency for Health Research and Quality
and other Federal agencies to--
``(A) evaluate and disseminate information relating to
evidence of the costs and benefits

[[Page S6335]]

of health information technology and to whom those costs and
benefits accrue;
``(B) evaluate and disseminate information on the impact of
health information technology on the quality and efficiency
of patient care; and
``(C) review Federal payment structures and differentials
for health care providers that utilize health information
technology systems.
``(7) Technical assistance.--The Office shall utilize
existing private sector quality improvement organizations
to--
``(A) promote the adoption of health information technology
among healthcare providers; and
``(B) provide technical assistance concerning the
implementation of health information technology to healthcare
providers.
``(8) Federal reimbursement.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date
of enactment of this title, the Office shall make
recommendations to the President and the Secretary of Health
and Human Service on changes to Federal reimbursement and
payment structures that would encourage the adoption of
information technology (IT) to improve health care quality
and safety.
``(B) Plan.--Not later than 90 days after receiving
recommendations under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall
provide to the relevant Committees of Congress a report that
provides, with respect to each recommendation, a plan for the
implementation, or an explanation as to why implementation is
inadvisable, of such recommendations. The Office shall
continue to monitor federally funded and
supported information technology and quality initiatives
(including the initiatives authorized in this title), and
periodically update recommendations to the President and
the Secretary.
``(d) Resources.--The President shall make available to the
Office, the resources, both financial and otherwise,
necessary to enable the Director to carry out the purposes
of, and perform the duties and responsibilities of the Office
under, this section.
``(e) Detail of Federal Employees.--Upon the request of the
Director, the head of any Federal agency is authorized to
detail, without reimbursement from the Office, any of the
personnel of such agency to the Office to assist it in
carrying out its duties under this section. Any such detail
shall not interrupt or otherwise affect the civil service
status or privileges of the Federal employee.

``SEC. 2903. PROMOTING THE INTEROPERABILITY OF HEALTH CARE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS.

``(a) Development, and Federal Government Adoption, of
Standards.--
``(1) Adoption.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
the enactment of this title, the Director, in collaboration
with the Consolidated Health Informatics Initiative (or a
successor organization to such Initiative), shall provide for
the adoption by the Federal Government of national data and
communication health information technology standards that
promote the efficient exchange of data between varieties of
provider health information technology systems. In carrying
out the preceding sentence, the Director may adopt existing
standards. Except as otherwise provided for in this title,
standards adopted under this section shall be voluntary for
private sector entities.
``(B) Grants or contracts.--The Director may utilize grants
or contracts to provide for the private sector development of
standards for adoption by the Federal Government under
subparagraph (A).
``(C) Definition.--In this paragraph, the term `provide
for' means that the Director shall promulgate, and each
Federal agency or department shall adopt, regulations to
ensure that each such agency or department complies with the
requirements of subsection (b).
``(2) Requirements.--The standards developed and adopted
under paragraph (1) shall be designed to--
``(A) enable health information technology to be used for
the collection and use of clinically specific data;
``(B) promote the interoperability of health care
information across health care settings;
``(C) facilitate clinical decision support through the use
of health information technology; and
``(D) ensure the privacy and confidentiality of medical
records.
``(3) Public private partnership.--Consistent with
activities being carried out on the date of enactment of this
title, including the Consolidated Health Informatics
Initiative (or a successor organization to such Initiative),
health information technology standards shall be adopted by
the Director under paragraph (1) at the conclusion of a
collaborative process that includes consultation between the
Federal Government and private sector health care and
information technology stakeholders.
``(4) Privacy and security.--The regulations promulgated by
the Secretary under part C of title XI of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 1320d et seq.) and sections 261, 262, 263, and
264 of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability
Act of 1996 (42 U.S.C. 1320d-2 note) with respect to the
privacy, confidentiality, and security of health information
shall apply to the implementation of programs and activities
under this title.
``(5) Pilot tests.--To the extent practical, the Director
shall pilot test the health information technology data
standards developed under paragraph (1) prior to their
implementation under this section.
``(6) Dissemination.--
``(A) In general.--The Director shall ensure that the
standards adopted under paragraph (1) are widely disseminated
to interested stakeholders.
``(B) Licensing.--To facilitate the dissemination and
implementation of the standards developed and adopted under
paragraph (1), the Director may license such standards, or
utilize other means, to ensure the widespread use of such
standards.
``(b) Implementation of Standards.--
``(1) Purchase of systems by the secretary.--Effective
beginning on the date that is 1 year after the adoption of
the technology standards pursuant to subsection (a), the
Secretary shall not purchase any health care information
technology system unless such system is in compliance with
the standards adopted under subsection (a), nor shall the
Director approve any proposal pursuant to section 2902(c)(3)
unless such proposal utilizes systems that are in compliance
with the standards adopted under subsection (a).
``(2) Recipients of federal funds.--Effective on the date
described in paragraph (1), no appropriated funds may be used
to purchase a health care information technology system
unless such system is in compliance with applicable standards
adopted under subsection (a).
``(c) Modification of Standards.--The Director shall
provide for ongoing oversight of the health information
technology standards developed under subsection (a) to--
``(1) identify gaps or other shortcomings in such
standards; and
``(2) modify such standards when determined appropriate or
develop additional standards, in collaboration with standard
setting organizations.

``SEC. 2904. LOAN GUARANTEES FOR THE ADOPTION OF HEALTH
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY.

``(a) In General.--The Director shall guarantee payment of
the principal of and the interest on loans made to eligible
entities to enable such entities--
``(1) to implement local health information infrastructures
to facilitate the development of interoperability across
health care settings to improve quality and efficiency; or
``(2) to facilitate the purchase and adoption of health
information technology to improve quality and efficiency.
``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a loan
guarantee under subsection (a) an entity shall--
``(1) with respect to an entity desiring a loan guarantee--
``(A) under subsection (a)(1), be a coalition of entities
that represent an independent consortium of health care
stakeholders within a community that--
``(i) includes--

``(I) physicians (as defined in section 1881(r)(1) of the
Social Security Act);
``(II) hospitals; and
``(III) group health plans or other health insurance
issuers (as such terms are defined in section 2791); and

``(ii) may include any other health care providers; or
``(B) under subsection (a)(2) be a health care provider;
``(2) to the extent practicable, adopt the national health
information technology standards adopted under section 2903;
``(3) provide assurances that the entity shall submit to
the Director regular reports on the activities carried out
under the loan guarantee, including--
``(A) a description of the financial costs and benefits of
the project involved and of the entities to which such costs
and benefits accrue;
``(B) a description of the impact of the project on health
care quality and safety; and
``(C) a description of any reduction in duplicative or
unnecessary care as a result of the project involved;
``(4) provide assurances that not later than 30 days after
the development of the standard quality measures pursuant to
section 2906, the entity shall submit to the Director regular
reports on such measures, including provider level data and
analysis of the impact of information technology on such
measures;
``(5) prepare and submit to the Director an application at
such time, in such manner, and containing such information as
the Director may require.
``(c) Use of Funds.--Amounts received under a loan
guarantee under subsection (a) shall be used--
``(1) with respect to a loan guarantee described in
subsection (a)(1)--
``(A) to develop a plan for the implementation of a local
health information infrastructure under this section;
``(B) to establish systems for the sharing of data in
accordance with the national health information technology
standards developed under section 2903;
``(C) to purchase directly related integrated hardware and
software to establish an interoperable health information
technology system that is capable of linking to a local
health care information infrastructure; and
``(D) to train staff, maintain health information
technology systems, and maintain adequate security and
privacy protocols;
``(2) with respect to a loan guarantee described in
subsection (a)(2)--
``(A) to develop a plan for the purchase and installation
of health information technology;

[[Page S6336]]

``(B) to purchase directly related integrated hardware and
software to establish an interoperable health information
technology system that is capable of linking to a national or
local health care information infrastructure; and
``(C) to train staff, maintain health information
technology systems, and maintain adequate security and
privacy protocols; and
``(3) to carry out any other activities determined
appropriate by the Director.
``(d) Special Considerations for Certain Entities.--In
awarding loan guarantees under this section, the Director
shall give special consideration to eligible entities that--
``(1) provide service to low-income and underserved
populations; and
``(2) agree to electronically submit the information
described in paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (b) on a
daily basis.
``(e) Special Considerations for Local Health Information
Infrastructures.--In awarding loan guarantees under this
section to local health information infrastructures, the
Director shall give special consideration to eligible
entities that--
``(1) include at least 50 percent of the patients living in
the designated coverage area;
``(2) incorporate public health surveillance and reporting
into the overall architecture of the proposed infrastructure;
and
``(3) link local health information infrastructures.
``(f) Areas of Specific Interest.--In awarding loan
guarantees under this section, the Director shall include--
``(1) entities with a coverage area that includes an entire
State; and
``(2) entities with a multi-state coverage area.
``(g) Administrative Provisions.--
``(1) Aggregate amount.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the aggregate amount of principal of loans guaranteed under
subsection (a) with respect to an eligible entity may not
exceed $5,000,000. In any 12-month period the amount
disbursed to an eligible entity under this section (by a
lender under a guaranteed loan) may not exceed $5,000,000.
``(B) Exception.--The cumulative total of the principal of
the loans outstanding at any time to which guarantees have
been issued under subsection (a) may not exceed such
limitations as may be specified in appropriation Acts.
``(2) Protection of federal government.--
``(A) In general.--The Director may not approve an
application for a loan guarantee under this section unless
the Director determines that--
``(i) the terms, conditions, security (if any), and
schedule and amount of repayments with respect to the loan
are sufficient to protect the financial interests of the
United States and are otherwise reasonable, including a
determination that the rate of interest does not exceed such
percent per annum on the principal obligation outstanding as
the Director determines to be reasonable, taking into account
the range of interest rates prevailing in the private market
for loans with similar maturities, terms, conditions, and
security and the risks assumed by the United States; and
``(ii) the loan would not be available on reasonable terms
and conditions without the enactment of this section.
``(B) Recovery.--
``(i) In general.--The United States shall be entitled to
recover from the applicant for a loan guarantee under this
section the amount of any payment made pursuant to such loan
guarantee, unless the Director for good cause waives such
right of recovery, and, upon making any such payment, the
United States shall be subrogated to all of the rights of the
recipient of the payments with respect to which the loan was
made.
``(ii) Modification of terms.--Any terms and conditions
applicable to a loan guarantee under this section may be
modified by the Director to the extent the Director
determines it to be consistent with the financial interest of
the United States.
``(3) Defaults.--The Director may take such action as the
Director deems appropriate to protect the interest of the
United States in the event of a default on a loan guaranteed
under this section, including taking possession of, holding,
and using real property pledged as security for such a loan
guarantee.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this section, $250,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2006 through 2011.
``(2) Availability.--Amounts appropriated under
subparagraph (A) shall remain available for obligation until
expended.

``SEC. 2905. GRANTS FOR THE PURCHASE OF HEALTH INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY.

``(a) In General.--The Director may award competitive
grants to eligible entities--
``(1) to implement local health information infrastructures
to facilitate the development of interoperability across
health care settings; or
``(2) to facilitate the purchase and adoption of health
information technology.
``(b) Eligibility.--To be eligible to receive a grant under
section (a) an entity shall--
``(1) demonstrate financial need to the Director;
``(2) with respect to an entity desiring a grant--
``(A) under subsection (a)(1), represent an independent
consortium of health care stakeholders within a community
that--
``(i) includes--

``(ii) may include any other health care providers; or
``(B) under subsection (a)(2) be a health care provider
that provides health care services to low-income and
underserved populations;
``(3) adopt the national health information technology
standards developed under section 2903;
``(4) provide assurances that the entity shall submit to
the Director regular reports on the activities carried out
under the loan guarantee, including--
``(A) a description of the financial costs and benefits of
the project involved and of the entities to which such costs
and benefits accrue;
``(B) a description of the impact of the project on health
care quality and safety; and
``(C) a description of any reduction in duplicative or
unnecessary care as a result of the project involved;
``(5) provide assurances that not later than 30 days after
the development of the standard quality measures pursuant to
section 2906, the entity shall submit to the Director regular
reports on such measures, including provider level data and
analysis of the impact of information technology on such
measures;
``(6) prepare and submit to the Director an application at
such time, in such manner, and containing such information as
the Director may require; and
``(7) agree to provide matching funds in accordance with
subsection (g).
``(c) Use of Funds.--Amounts received under a grant under
subsection (a) shall be used to--
``(1) with respect to a grant described in subsection
(a)(1)--
``(A) to develop a plan for the implementation of a local
health information infrastructure under this section;
``(B) to establish systems for the sharing of data in
accordance with the national health information technology
standards developed under section 2903;
``(C) to implement, enhance, or upgrade a comprehensive,
electronic health information technology system; and
``(D) to maintain adequate security and privacy protocols;
``(2) with respect to a grant described in subsection
(a)(2)--
``(A) to develop a plan for the purchase and installation
of health information technology;
``(B) to purchase directly related integrated hardware and
software to establish an interoperable health information
technology system that is capable of linking to a national or
local health care information infrastructure; and
``(C) to train staff, maintain health information
technology systems, and maintain adequate security and
privacy protocols;
``(3) maintain adequate security and privacy protocols; and
``(4) to carry out any other activities determined
appropriate by the Director.
``(d) Special Considerations for Certain Entities.--In
awarding grants under this section, the Director shall give
special consideration to eligible entities that--
``(1) provide service to low-income and underserved
populations; and
``(2) agree to electronically submit the information
described in paragraphs (4) and (5) of subsection (b).
``(e) Special Considerations for Local Health Information
Infrastructures.--In awarding grants under this section to
local health information infrastructures, the Director shall
give special consideration to eligible entities that--
``(1) include at least 50 percent of the patients living in
the designated coverage area;
``(2) incorporate public health surveillance and reporting
into the overall architecture of the proposed infrastructure;
and
``(3) link local health information infrastructures;
``(f) Areas of Specific Interest.--In awarding grants under
this section, the Director shall include--
``(1) entities with a coverage area that includes an entire
State; and
``(2) entities with a multi-state coverage area.
``(g) Matching Requirement.--
``(1) In general.--The Director may not make a grant under
this section to an entity unless the entity agrees that, with
respect to the costs to be incurred by the entity in carrying
out the infrastructure program for which the grant was
awarded, the entity will make available (directly or through
donations from public or private entities) non-Federal
contributions toward such costs in an amount equal to not
less than 20 percent of such costs ($1 for each $5 of Federal
funds provided under the grant).
``(2) Determination of amount contributed.--Non-Federal
contributions required under paragraph (1) may be in cash or
in kind, fairly evaluated, including equipment, technology,
or services. Amounts provided by the Federal Government, or
services assisted or subsidized to any significant extent

[[Page S6337]]

by the Federal Government, may not be included in determining
the amount of such non-Federal contributions.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this section, $250,000,000 for each of fiscal
years 2006 through 2011.
``(2) Availability.--Amounts appropriated under paragraph
(1) shall remain available for obligation until expended.''.

SEC. 3. STANDARDIZED MEASURES OF QUALITY HEALTH CARE AND DATA
COLLECTION.

Title XXIX of the Public Health Service Act, as added by
section 2, is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 2906. STANDARDIZED MEASURES OF QUALITY HEALTH CARE.

``(a) In General.--
``(1) Collaboration.--The Secretary of Health and Human
Services, the Secretary of Defense, and the Secretary of
Veterans Affairs (referred to in this section as the
`Secretaries'), in consultation with the Quality Interagency
Coordination Taskforce (as established by Executive Order on
March 13, 1998), the Institute of Medicine, the Joint
Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, the
National Committee for Quality Assurance, the American Health
Quality Association, the National Quality Forum, the Medicare
Payment Advisory Committee, and other individuals and
organizations determined appropriate by the Secretaries,
shall establish uniform health care quality measures to
assess the effectiveness, timeliness, patient-centeredness,
efficiency, equity, and safety of care delivered across all
federally supported health delivery programs.
``(2) Development of measures.--Not later than 18 months
after the date of enactment of this title, the Secretaries
shall develop standardized sets of quality measures for each
of the 20 priority areas for improvement in health care
quality as identified by the Institute of Medicine in their
report entitled `Priority Areas for National Action' in 2003,
or other such areas as identified by the Secretaries in order
to assist beneficiaries in making informed choices about
health plans or care delivery systems. The selection of
appropriate quality indicators under this subsection shall
include the evaluation criteria formulated by clinical
professionals, consumers, and data collection experts.
``(3) Pilot testing.--Each federally supported health
delivery program may conduct a pilot test of the quality
measures developed under paragraph (2) that shall include a
collection of patient-level data and a public release of
comparative performance reports.
``(b) Public Reporting Requirements.--The Secretaries,
working collaboratively, shall establish public reporting
requirements for clinicians, institutional providers, and
health plans in each of the federally supported health
delivery program described in subsection (a). Such
requirements shall provide that the entities described in the
preceding sentence shall report to the appropriate Secretary
on the measures developed under subsection (a).
``(c) Full Implementation.--The Secretaries, working
collaboratively, shall implement all sets of quality measures
and reporting systems developed under subsections (a) and (b)
by not later than the date that is 1 year after the date on
which the measures are developed under subsection (a)(2).
``(d) Reports.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this title, and annually thereafter, the
Secretary shall--
``(1) submit to Congress a report that details the
collaborative efforts carried out under subsection (a), the
progress made on standardizing quality indicators throughout
the Federal Government, and the state of quality measurement
for priority areas that links data to the report submitted
under paragraph (2) for the year involved; and
``(2) submit to Congress a report that details areas of
clinical care requiring further research necessary to
establish effective clinical treatments that will serve as a
basis for additional quality indicators.
``(e) Comparative Quality Reports.--Beginning not later
than 3 years after the date of enactment of this title, in
order to make comparative quality information available to
health care consumers, including members of health disparity
populations, health professionals, public health officials,
researchers, and other appropriate individuals and entities,
the Secretaries shall provide for the pooling, analysis, and
dissemination of quality measures collected under this
section. Nothing in this section shall be construed as
modifying the privacy standards under the Health Insurance
Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-
191).
``(f) Ongoing Evaluation of Use.--The Secretary of Health
and Human Services shall ensure the ongoing evaluation of the
use of the health care quality measures established under
this section.
``(g) Evaluation and Regulations.--
``(1) Evaluation.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall, directly or
indirectly through a contract with another entity, conduct an
evaluation of the collaborative efforts of the Secretaries to
establish uniform health care quality measures and reporting
requirements for federally supported health care delivery
programs as required under this section.
``(B) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this title, the Secretary of Health and Human
Services shall submit a report to the appropriate committees
of Congress concerning the results of the evaluation under
subparagraph (A).
``(2) Regulations.--
``(A) Proposed.--Not later than 6 months after the date on
which the report is submitted under paragraph (1)(B), the
Secretary shall publish proposed regulations regarding the
application of the uniform health care quality measures and
reporting requirements described in this section to federally
supported health delivery programs.
``(B) Final regulations.--Not later than 1 year after the
date on which the report is submitted under paragraph (1)(B),
the Secretary shall publish final regulations regarding the
uniform health care quality measures and reporting
requirements described in this section.
``(h) Definitions.--In this section, the term `federally
supported health delivery program' means a program that is
funded by the Federal Government under which health care
items or services are delivered directly to patients.''.
______

By Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mr. Lautenberg):
S. 1224. A bill to protect the oceans, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, as we commemorate World Oceans Week, we
celebrate the wonder and beauty of the world's oceans. We celebrate the
role our oceans play in commerce, fishing and shipping. We celebrate
the beauty of our coral reefs and the potential lifesaving cures they
might contain. And we celebrate our commitment to improving the health
of our oceans, so that our children and grandchildren will have a
chance to enjoy and cherish them.
That is why I am pleased to introduce the National Oceans Protection
Act of 2005--comprehensive legislation to improve the health and
governance of our oceans. The bill is co-sponsored by Senator
Lautenberg.
This legislation ``was written after two major oceans commission
reports in the past two years determined that our oceans are in a state
of crisis. The congressionally-established U.S. Commission on Ocean
Policy and the independent Pew Oceans Commission provided detailed
descriptions of the challenges our oceans are facing as well as
specific solutions to improve ocean health.
From pollution to over-fishing to invasive species, there are many
factors that have contributed to the current crisis in which we find
ourselves. Pollution threatens all aspects of ocean health. Every 8
months, nearly 11 million gallons of oil flow from American roads into
our waters--the equivalent of the Exxon Valdez oil spill.
Our oceans are also showing signs of being over-fished, which affects
the communities that depend on fish stocks for their livelihood. Many
fish populations, including salmon, face the threat of being depleted
to seriously low levels. Invasive species--such as the killer algae
found near San Diego in 2000--are another threat to ocean health. In
the San Francisco Bay alone, more than 175 invasive species threaten to
overwhelm native species.
By targeting some of the most serious challenges facing our oceans,
as outlined in the Commissions' reports, my legislation provides a
comprehensive national approach to oceans protection and preservation.
Let me just mention a couple of the important provisions in four key
areas:
First, the bill improves the governance of the oceans by giving the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration the independence it
needs to better facilitate the management and oversight of our oceans.
Second, the bill protects and conserves marine wildlife and habitat
by, among other things, creating protection areas and authorizing $50
million per year in grants to local communities to restore fisheries
and coastal areas.
Third, the bill strengthens fisheries and encourages sustainable
fishing in a number of ways, including requiring that entire ecosystems
be taken into account when considering the health of a fishery.
And, fourth, the bill improves the quality of ocean water by
establishing maximum amounts of pollution that a body of water can hold
and still be healthy. In addition, financial assistance will be
provided to local governments to reduce pollution and increase
monitoring.
For their contributions to this legislation and their great
leadership on

[[Page S6338]]

oceans issues, I would like to thank Senators Inouye, Gregg,
Lautenberg, and Levin, as well as former Senator Hollings.
It is my hope that this bill will provide the framework needed to
protect and improve our oceans. The great environmentalist and ocean-
explorer Jacques Cousteau once said, ``If we were logical, the future
would be bleak, indeed. But we are more than logical. We are human
beings, and we have faith, and we have hope, and we can work.''
As we celebrate World Oceans Week, it is my hope that we can work
together to provide a bright future for the world's oceans and continue
to protect our coastal economy.
I encourage my colleagues to join me in this effort to implement the
recommendations of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy and the Pew
Ocean Commission.
I ask unanimous consent that a summary of the bill and list of
endorsements be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

The National Oceans Protection Act

1. IMPROVING THE GOVERNANCE OF THE OCEANS

The Ernest ``Fritz'' Hollings National Ocean Policy and
Leadership Act
Establishes an independent National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA).
Independence will occur after a two-year transition period.
Creates a Council on Ocean Stewardship that will annually
review funding, policy recommendations, and programs for
ocean protection.
The Council will function as a federal coordinating body of
the various agencies that deal with oceans issues, and will
be placed in the Executive Office of the President.
Other Governance Provisions
Requires that all activities on the Outer Continental
Shelf--such as wave energy projects, bioextraction by biotech
companies, and wind energy projects--receive a federal permit
to ensure that projects do not pose an adverse threat to the
health of the oceans current law only requires permits for
oil and gas activities.
NOAA, working with other relevant agencies such as the EPA
or the Army Corps of Engineers, will develop the permitting
process, specifically to protect and preserve the marine
environment, conserve fisheries and natural resources, and
protect public health and safety.
NOAA makes the final determination of whether the activity
poses a threat to any of these interests--and if so, a permit
will not be given.
Establishes a Trust Fund in the U.S. Treasury and
administered by NOAA composed of Federal money generated from
these newly permitted activities; funds will be used for
ocean conservation, science and research, and assistance to
displaced fishermen.
Prohibits NOAA from issuing any lease for marine
aquaculture until strong national standards and regulations
are issued to protect fish stocks from disease, parasites,
and invasive species and to prevent water quality impairment.

2. PROTECTING AND CONSERVING MARINE WILDLIFE AND HABITAT

Provides protection for ecologically-important coral areas
by creating ``Coral Management Areas.''
NOAA must carry out a comprehensive ocean exploration and
mapping program to determine areas where coral and other
creatures live and the marine environments on which they
depend for food and habitat.
Based on this data, NOAA may establish Coral Management
Areas, which would trigger protection from certain fishing
gear and practices, such as `rockhopper' trawling gear on
fishing nets that tear up essential habitat.
Authorizes $3 million per year for research on the effects
of noise pollution (i.e. sonar) on marine mammals.
Establishes a voluntary buyback program for environmentally
and ecologically unsafe ``gear''--such as boat engines.
Prohibits almost all discharges of ballast water in U.S.
waters and requires ships to install technology to capture
invasive species in ballast water before discharge--and
creates an early detection and rapid response system to
provide assistance to states to protect against invasive
species.
Authorizes $50 million per year in grants to local
communities to restore fishery and coastal habitats.
Authorizes $500 million per year in grants to local
communities to purchase lands that are vulnerable to
development and are important to the protection and
preservation of habitats.

3. STRENGTHENING FISHERIES AND FISH HABITAT

Requires that, when determining the health of a fishery,
the entire ecosystem be taken into account, not just the
health of a particular fish species.
Each regional fishery council must establish a science and
statistical committee (SSC) to help develop, collect, and
evaluate statistical, biological, economic, social, and other
scientific information--the regional councils must then set
fish take allowances that are consistent with the SSC
determinations, but even greater conservation measures can be
taken.
Authorizes $115 million over five years for NOAA and the
regional fishery councils to develop ecosystem-wide plans to
protect and sustain fisheries.
Requires NOAA to establish standards for reducing bycatch
and authorizes $55 million over five years to monitor
compliance with those standards.
Creates Individual Fishing Quotas (IFQ) that are equitably
allocated and that protect against bycatch, overfishing, and
economic harm to local communities.

4. IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF OCEAN WATER

Requires EPA to establish maximum amounts of nutrient
runoff pollution that a body of water can hold and still be
healthy, taking into account regional conditions and
reasonable economic considerations.
Requires water utilities to establish water treatment
standards to remove nutrient pollution.
Mandates best management practices for agriculture--
requiring farmers, to the greatest extent practicable, to
take steps to curtail runoff.
Expedites beach pollution testing and posting by
determining which beaches are most at risk of dangerous water
conditions and requiring beach closures as soon as
practicable but not longer than 48 hours after discovery.
Requires public notification and testing of sewer
overflows.
Authorizes $11.2 billion per year in funding for state and
local governments to reduce stormwater pollution and to
increase monitoring and testing.
Requires a survey and continuous monitoring of contaminated
sediments that are threats to bodies of water, and
establishes standards to protect sensitive aquatic species
from contaminated sediments.
____

Support for the National Oceans Protection Act of 2005

NATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Natural Resources Defense Council; The Ocean Conservancy;
Oceana; Sierra Club; National Environmental Trust; Worldwide
Fund for Conservation; U.S. PIRG; Defenders of Wildlife; E2
(Environmental Entrepreneurs); Ocean Champions; Blue Frontier
Campaign; Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's
Associations; Marine Fish Conservation Network; The Humane
Society; ASPCA; Seaflow; Surfrider; Association of National
Estuary Programs; Ocean Defense International; Earth Island
Institute; Waterkeepers; America's Whale Alliance; Center for
International Environmental Law; Acoustic Ecology Institute;
Greenpeace Foundation; Earthtrust; Western Wildlife
Conservancy; Mangrove Action Project; The Whaleman
Foundation; Campaign to Safeguard America's Waters; Reef
Relief; WildLaw; Conservation Law Foundation; Cook Inlet
Keeper; Cry of the Water; Global Coral Reef Alliance; Save
Our Shoreline, Inc; Marine Conservation Biology Institute;
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER);
Reef Protection International; International Forum on
Globalization; The Ocean Mammal Institute; Endangered Species
Coalition.

california organizations

California League of Conservation Voters; Aquatic
Adventures Science Education Foundation, San Diego; The Bay
Institute, Novato; Baykeeper, San Francisco; Bolinas Lagoon
Foundation, Stinson Beach; California Greenworks, Buena Park;
Catalina Island Conservancy, Avalon; Community Environmental
Council, Santa Barbara; Crystal Cove Alliance, Corona Del
Mar; Endangered Habitats League, Los Angeles; The
Environmental Action Committee of West Marin, Point Reyes
Station; Environmental Center of San Luis Obispo County, San
Luis Obispo; Environmental Defense Center, Santa Barbara;
Friends of Santa Ana Zoo, Santa Ana; Friends of the Sea
Otter, Pacific Grove; Golden Gate Audubon Society, Berkeley;
Grassroots Coalition, Los Angeles; Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes
Center and Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes Collaborative; Heal the
Bay, Santa Monica; Huntington Beach Tree Society, Huntington
Beach; The Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito; Monterey Bay
Aquarium, Monterey Monterey Bay Sanctuary Foundation,
Monterey Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, Moss Landing;
Newport Bay Naturalists and Friends, Newport Beach; The Ocean
Conservancy, Santa Cruz Field Office Ocean Institute, Dana
Point; O'Neill Sea Odyssey, Santa Cruz; The Orange County
Interfaith Coalition for the Environment, Tustin; PRBO
Conservation Science, Stinson Beach; San Diego Audubon
Society, San Diego; San Diego Baykeeper San Francisco Zoo,
San Francisco; San Luis Bay Surfrider Foundation, San Luis
Obispo San Luis Obispo Coastkeeper, San Luis Obispo; Santa
Barbara Channelkeper, Santa Barbara; Santa Monica Bay Audubon
Society, Santa Monica Save Our Shores, Santa Cruz; Sea
Studios Foundation, Monterey; Southwest Wetlands Interpretive
Association, Imperial Beach; Steinhart Aquarium at the
California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco; Surfrider
Foundation, Marin County; Surfrider Foundation--Monterey
Chapter; Trillium Press, Brisbane; Wildcoast, Imperial Beach;
Wishtoyo Foundation, Oxnard; Baykeeper, San Francisco;
Catalina Island Conservancy, Avalon; Environmental Defense
Center, Santa Barbara; The Marine Mammal Center, Sausalito.

ELECTED OFFICIALS

Marty Blum, Mayor, City of Santa Barbara; Harold Brown,
President, Marin County Board of Supervisors; Denise Moreno

[[Page S6339]]

Ducheny, California State Senator, 40th District; Donna Frye,
Councilniember, City of San Diego; Fred Keeley, Treasurer-Tax
Collector, County of Santa Cruz; Christine Kehoe, California
State Senator, 39th District; John Laird, California State
Assembly member, 27th Assembly District; Patricia McCoy,
Councilmember, City of Imperial Beach; Kevin McKeown,
Councilmember, City of Santa Monica; Aaron Peskin, President,
San Francisco Board of Supervisors; Wayne Rayfield, Mayor,
City of Dana Point; Murray Rosenbluth, Mayor, City of Port
Hueneme; Diana Rose, Mayor, City of Imperial Beach; Susan
Rose, Supervisor, Santa Barbara County; Bill Rosendahl,
Councilmember-Elect, City of Los Angeles; Lori Saldafina,
Californa State Assembly member and Assistant Majority Whip,
76th District; Esther Sanchez, Deputy Mayor, City of
Oceanside; Das Williams, Councilmember, City of Santa
Barbara; Mayda Winter, Councilmember, City of Imperial Beach.

INDIVIDUALS

Jean-Michel Cousteau, President, Ocean Futures Society; Dr.
Sylvia Earle, Explorer-in Residence, the National Geographic
Society; Gary Griggs, Director, Institute of Marine Sciences,
University of California Santa Cruz; David Helvarg, Author,
Blue Frontier--Saving America's Living Seas; Kurt Lieber,
President and Founder, Ocean Defenders Alliance; Mark
Silberstein, Executive Director, Elkhorn Slough Foundation;
Dr. Susan Williams, Director, Bodega Marine Laboratory.

OTHER ORGANIZATIONS

Gulf of Mexico Foundation; Turtle Island Restoration
Network; Potomac Riverkeeper; Coastwalk; Gulf Restoration
Network; Florida Oceanographic Society; Patapsco Riverkeeper,
Inc.; The Coastal Marine Resource Center of New York; New
York Whale and Dolphin Action League; San Francisco Ocean
Film Festival.

____________________