[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 32 (Tuesday, March 14, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2124-S2128]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. SANTORUM:
S. 2408. A bill to require the Director of National Intelligence to
release documents captured in Afghanistan or Iraq during Operation
Desert Storm, Operation Enduring Freedom, or Operation Iraqi Freedom;
to the Select Committee on Intelligence.
Mr. SANTORUM. Mr. President, I rise today to offer remarks on
legislation that I am introducing today here in the Senate.
This legislation concerns the need to release military documents and
photographs recovered in Iraq and Afghanistan. Specifically, the bill
requires the Director of National Intelligence to make publicly
available on an Internet website documents captured in Afghanistan or
Iraq during Operation Desert Storm, Operation Enduring Freedom, or
Operation Iraqi Freedom.
In my conversations with President Bush and Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld, I urged that efforts to examine these documents and
photographs be accelerated. With U.S. and Coalition forces actively
engaged in Iraq, the analysis and release of these documents should be
made a top priority within the Department of Defense.
Recently, I gave a speech at the Valley Forge Military Academy in
Pennsylvania concerning ongoing military operations in Iraq and
detailed why we must prevail. In my speech, I noted that U.S. and
Coalition forces are fighting the forces of Islamic fascism and those
who seek to overthrow the values and beliefs that civilized nations
cherish. In short, this is a battle we cannot afford to lose.
By way of background, The Weekly Standard published several articles
detailing a number of these documents and the information contained
within them which ``connect the dots'' between Saddam Hussein and the
training of Islamic terrorists. Among the points highlighted in a
recent The Weekly Standard article:
The photographs and documents on Iraqi training camps come
from a collection of some 2 million ``exploitable items''
captured in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan. They include
handwritten notes, typed documents, audiotapes, videotapes,
compact discs, floppy discs, and computer hard drives . . .
Nearly three years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, only
50,000 of these 2 million ``exploitable items'' have been
thoroughly examined.
Many of the translated and analyzed documents were entered into a
government database known as ``HARMONY.'' It is now 4 years since these
documents were captured. I understand that previous requests to release
information from the HARMONY database have been rejected or delayed. It
is reasonable to assume that over the course of the last 4 years any
actionable intelligence contained within these documents has already
been exploited.
It is imperative that documents captured in Iraq which highlight the
connections between Saddam Hussein's brutal regime and Islamic
terrorists be released as soon as possible. These documents are
increasingly necessary to help the American people understand both the
reasons for our involvement in Iraq and the challenge of defending
freedom and democracy.
However, in the interest of national security, the bill permits the
Director of National Intelligence to withhold making a document
publicly available--provided he informs the relevant congressional
committees of the justification for not disclosing the document.
______
By Mr. SMITH (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Nelson
of Florida, and Mrs. Lincoln):
S. 2409. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
reduce cost-sharing under part D of such title for certain non-
institutionalized full-benefit dual eligible individuals; to the
Committee on Finance.
Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, today I am proud to join with my
colleagues, Senators Bingaman, Clinton and Nelson, to introduce the
Home and Community Based Services Copayment Equity Act of 2006. This
important piece of legislation addresses a significant oversight in the
Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit. While nearly 22 million
seniors now have access to affordable prescription drug coverage under
the program, many of the most vulnerable Medicare beneficiaries are
being charged unnecessary copayments simply based upon how they choose
to receive their long-term care services.
Under current law, dual eligible Medicare beneficiaries, those who
qualify for both Medicaid and Medicare coverage, receive a subsidy from
the government to pay the benefit's required $250 deductible. These
individuals also qualify for reduced copayments for both generic and
brand named drugs in the amount of one and three dollars respectively.
If a dual-eligible beneficiary receives long-term care services in an
institutional setting, such as a nursing home, he or she is exempt from
paying the required copayment. Congress decided to provide this
assistance because dual-eligible beneficiaries residing in nursing
homes live off of very limited incomes. For instance, in Oregon the
personal needs allowance beneficiaries receive each month for
incidentals, including medications, is only $30. As many
institutionalized beneficiaries are on multiple medications, they would
not be able to meet their share of drug costs.
This is the very reason Congress provided institutionalized dual-
eligible beneficiaries with an exemption from all copayments under
Medicare Part D. However, many dual eligible beneficiaries choose to
receive long-term care services in home or community-based settings,
such as assisted living or resident care program facilities. Almost all
states have chosen to establish Home and Community Based Services
Medicaid demonstration projects that have expanded access to community
based alternatives to an even greater number of low-income elderly
Americans. The State of Oregon operates one of the Nation's most
successful HCS waivers, serving approximately 23,500 dual eligible
beneficiaries this year. My State has a thriving community based care
industry that has provided many dual eligible Oregonians the freedom to
choose the care setting that best meets their own physical and social
needs.
While dual eligible beneficiaries are exempted from prescription drug
copayments under Medicare Part D, those choosing community based
alternatives are required to pay them. This is despite the fact that
beneficiaries choosing community based care options typically live off
of the same limited incomes as those residing in nursing homes. Despite
the fact that some States provide HCS beneficiaries a larger personal
stipend each month, they may have greater financial demands. At the end
of the day, they are in no better position to pay the costs of
prescription drugs than those beneficiaries living in nursing homes.
[[Page S2125]]
I should also note that their less restrictive living environments
may require them to take additional medications to support their daily
routines. It is not uncommon for dual eligible beneficiaries in
community-based care settings to be on 8 to 10 medications at a given
time. At that level, even minimal copayments create a significant
financial burden to these individuals.
The current dual-eligible copayment exemption policy is not only
creating inequity in Medicare Part D, it is potentially restricting
access to life-saving medications. This is certainly not what Congress
intended when it created the new prescription drug benefit, especially
for this incredibly vulnerable population. If Congress does not act
quickly to extend the exemption to dual eligible beneficiaries in
community based care, individuals may begin to gravitate toward
institutional options simply because they can have their drugs costs
paid in those settings. I believe we need to do everything possible to
support choice in long-term care, and by applying the current
institutional copayment exemption more uniformly, Congress will ensure
the Medicare drug benefit does not adversely affect beneficiaries
choices.
I ask my colleagues to improve the fairness of the Medicare
prescription drug benefit for all dual eligible beneficiaries by
supporting the Home and Community Based Copayment Equity Act. I hope
you will join me in calling for its quick passage in the Senate.
Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce bipartisan
legislation with my colleagues Senators Smith, Nelson, and Bingaman to
address yet another serious flaw in the Medicare prescription drug
benefit that has come to light.
On January 1, the new Medicare prescription drug benefit went into
effect. Overnight, millions of seniors and disabled Americans found
themselves thrown into a confusing and complex transition.
Some of our poorest and most vulnerable beneficiaries, those in
assisted living facilities, have found themselves suddenly forced to
produce co-payments to get the medications they need.
These are beneficiaries with serious mental illnesses who have been
stabilized on medications, and people with developmental and physical
disabilities who have little or no incomes and no way to afford the
medicines that they depend on.
The bill we are introducing will fix this problem by waiving co-
payments for this group of vulnerable beneficiaries in the same manner
that these co-payments are already waived for Medicare beneficiaries in
nursing homes.
This is just one of so many problems we have seen plaguing this
program. I am working on all fronts to help Medicare beneficiaries
weather this transition. Before this program went into effect, it was
clear that those dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, our poorest
and most vulnerable seniors and disabled, would have a particular
challenge navigating this transition. I was very concerned that many of
these Medicare recipients would walk up to their pharmacy counters on
January 1 and be unable to get their prescriptions filled.
In anticipation of these problems, I introduced legislation in
December to keep these Medicare recipients from falling through the
cracks by stepping up outreach and education to pharmacists and
providing reimbursement to pharmacists who are charged a transaction
fee to access beneficiary information through Medicare. I also co-
sponsored legislation to give Medicare beneficiaries more time to
enroll in the new program.
And I issued a resource guide, now available in both English and
Spanish, to help New Yorkers navigate this new program. To date more
than 75,000 copies of the guide have been distributed.
Since the new program went into effect, I have repeatedly urged the
Bush Administration to address the problems plaguing this program. And
in January, I introduced comprehensive legislation along with several
of my Senate colleagues, that includes my bill to help pharmacists help
their customers, and makes the other fixes I have been calling for:
provisions to improve outreach and education, fix problems with drug
plans transition programs, protect the benefits of seniors who also
have coverage from a retiree drug plan, and make sure that states and
low income beneficiaries are reimbursed for excessive costs they have
been forced to shoulder by the inept implementation of the new benefit.
We owe it to our seniors and disabled Americans to get this right.
And I will keep fighting to ensure that we do.
Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my
colleagues Senators Smith, Bingaman and Clinton as we introduce the
Home and Community Services Co-payment Equity Act of 2006.
For years now, I have advocated providing seniors and the disabled
with meaningful prescription drug coverage. No one in this country
should ever have to choose between their meals and their medications.
In 2003, Congress passed the Medicare Modernization Act, which created
a Medicare prescription drug program. I did not support this
legislation, because I believe it created a program that contains
several major flaws. However, I think that our job now is to do our
best to help beneficiaries by fixing the underlying law.
The Medicare prescription drug program exempts the lowest income
nursing home residents from all prescription drug co-payments. However,
it leaves out the equally vulnerable group of low-income beneficiaries
who live in assisted living and other home and community-based
facilities. These are often beneficiaries with serious mental illnesses
who have been stabilized on medications, and people with developmental
and physical disabilities who have little or no incomes and previously
received prescription drug coverage under Medicaid.
In my home State of Florida, thousands of individuals with mental
illnesses are integrated into community-based programs such as
assisted-living facilities. Unfortunately, many patients in these
facilities are forgoing their medications on account of the new
Medicare co-payments. Reports also indicate that patients have been
hospitalized because they have been unable to afford their essential
medications due to the new cost-sharing requirements.
In response, we are introducing the Home and Community Services Co-
payment Equity Act of 2006. The legislation would waive co-payments for
low-income beneficiaries residing in assisted living and other home-
and community-based facilities. This bill is a small step that will go
a long way towards ensuring that low-income patients get their
prescription drugs.
This issue boils down to just one goal--helping low-income seniors
and people with disabilities afford the medications they need. I urge
all of our colleagues, from both sides of the aisle, to join us in this
vital effort.
______
By Mr. COLEMAN (for himself, Mr. Levin, and Mr. Graham):
S. 2410. A bill to amend the Homeland-Security Act of 2002 to limit
foreign control of investments in certain United States critical
infrastructure; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban
Affairs.
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill which I am introducing today, the Foreign Investment
Transparency and Security Act of 2006, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2410
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 Investment
Transparency and Security Act of 2006''.
SEC. 2. LIMITS ON FOREIGN CONTROL OF INVESTMENTS IN CERTAIN
UNITED STATES CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE.
(a) In General.--Title II of the Homeland Security Act of
2002 (6 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following:
``Subtitle E--Limits on Foreign Control of Investments in Certain
United States Critical Infrastructure
``SEC. 241. DEFINITIONS.
``As used in this subtitle--
``(1) the term `foreign government controlled entity' means
any entity in which a foreign government owns a majority
interest, or otherwise controls or manages the entity; and
``(2) the term `general business corporation' means any
entity that qualifies for
[[Page S2126]]
treatment for Federal taxation purposes under subchapter C or
subchapter S of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
established or organized under the laws of any State.
``SEC. 242. LIMITATION ON FOREIGN INVESTMENTS.
``(a) In General.--A foreign government controlled entity
may acquire, own, or otherwise control or manage any critical
infrastructure of the United States only through the
establishment or operation of a foreign owned general
business corporation that meets the requirements of
subsection (b).
``(b) Requirements.--For purposes of this section, a
general business corporation shall--
``(1) have a board of directors, the majority of which is
comprised of United States citizens;
``(2) have a chief security officer who is a United States
citizen, responsible for safety and security issues related
to the critical infrastructure; and
``(3) maintain all records related to operations,
personnel, and security of the United States general business
corporation in the United States.
``(c) Rule of Construction.--Nothing in this subtitle may
be construed to restrict or otherwise alter the authority of
the President or the Committee on Foreign Investment in the
United States (or any successor thereto) as the designee of
the President, under section 721 of the Defense Production
Act of 1950.
``SEC. 243. REGULATIONS REQUIRED.
``Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of
this subtitle, the Secretary, in coordination with the
Secretary of the Treasury, shall promulgate final regulations
to carry out this subtitle.
``SEC. 244. EFFECTIVE DATE.
``(a) In General.--Section 242 shall apply beginning on the
date that is 6 months after the date of enactment of this
subtitle.
``(b) Existing Entities.--A foreign government controlled
entity that owns or otherwise controls or manages any
critical infrastructure of the United States on the effective
date of this subtitle shall comply with the requirements of
this subtitle not later than 180 days after that effective
date.''.
(b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents under
section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
101) is amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 237 the following:
``Subtitle E--Limits on Foreign Control of Investments in Certain
United States Critical Infrastructure
``Sec. 241. Definitions.
``Sec. 242. Limitation on foreign investments.
``Sec. 243. Regulations required.
``Sec. 244. Effective date.''.
SEC. 3. MARITIME SECURITY.
(a) Findings.--Congress finds that--
(1) existing scanning processes for maritime containers are
insufficient;
(2) it should be the goal of the United States to scan 100
percent of inbound maritime containers; and
(3) the maritime container inspection system employed in
Hong Kong shows promise in enhancing the maritime security
capabilities of the United States.
(b) Amendments to Homeland Security Act.--
(1) In general.--Subtitle A of title IV of the Homeland
Security Act (6 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``SEC. 404. REPORT ON SCANNING OF MARITIME CONTAINERS.
``(a) Report to Congress.--Not later than 90 days after the
date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit
a report to Congress detailing the processes and policies for
implementation of a scanning system for 100 percent of the
inbound maritime containers described in subsection (a).
``(b) Definition of Container.--The term `container' has
the meaning given the term in the International Convention
for Safe Containers, with annexes, done at Geneva December 2,
1972 (29 UST 3707).''.
(2) Conforming amendment.--The table of contents under
section 1(b) of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C.
101) is amended by inserting after the item relating to
section 403 the following:
``Sec. 404. Report on scanning of maritime containers.''.
______
By Mr. BIDEN:
S. 2412. A bill to address homeland security issues relating to first
responders, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the use of technology,
Federal, State, and local coordination, and critical infrastructure,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the 9/11 Commission
Recommendations Implementation Act of 2006. This legislation will
provide $41.625 billion over the next 10 years to help ensure that we
implement the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.
Back in July of 2004, the 9/11 Commission--with distinguished
bipartisan leadership from former Republican Governor Tom Kean and
former Congressman Lee Hamilton--issued its report with recommendations
of what the government should do to help better protect the Nation.
Nearly a year and a half later, they issued a so-called report card
to tell us how well the government had been doing at implementing their
recommendations.
Well, it doesn't look good. That report card was riddled with Cs, Ds,
Fs, and incompletes.
Most Americans believe that we've taken the obvious steps to close
the gaps in our homeland defense. They believe that at the very least,
we have a plan, that we've set priorities, and that we know what the
next steps are.
But, let me quote from the Commission's report card from December on
what we've done to assess the risks and vulnerabilities of our critical
infrastructure--transportation, communications, and industrial assets.
Here's what they say--and I quote--``no risk and vulnerability
assessments have actually been made. No national priorities are yet
established. No recommendations have been made on the allocation of
scarce resources. All key decisions on homeland security are at least a
year away.''
We all remember 9/11, when we learned for the first time that local
police, fire, and rescue units could not communicate with each other
and could not communicate with Federal agencies. We saw how this
inability probably resulted in many deaths that could have been
prevented. Well, we learned during Hurricane Katrina that things are no
better today. No better today.
The one place I think most Americans think we've probably done pretty
well--passenger screening--actually got an ``F.'' The 9/11 commission
reports stated that, in fact, ``few improvements have been made to the
existing passenger screening system since right after 9/11.'' With
respect to checked bag and cargo screening for commercial flights, the
9/11 Commission gave a score of ``D'', stating that ``improvements have
not been made a priority by Congress or the Bush Administration.''
This is unacceptable. This Administration hasn't even filled in the
very obvious gaps in our homeland defense. We haven't done it. We
simply haven't done it.
The bill that I am introducing today will ensure that we address the
most obvious gaps in our homeland defense. It begins with those areas
where the Commission graded us and the President as ``F'' and ``D.''
And, it addresses those areas that were outside the scope of the report
but are commonsense things that we should be doing, such as securing
the rails and providing funding for local law enforcement.
And it's pretty basic. We have done nothing much to deal with the
problems most Americans know relate to homeland security. We are safer
but not nearly safe enough. The bipartisan commission that got great
grades from everybody in the Nation felt compelled on their own dime,
their own money, their own resources, not funded by the government, to
continue to issue reports and to hold hearings. And they issued a
report on December 5 that is, quite frankly, embarrassing and
dangerous.
We can and we have to marshal all our country's resources in this
struggle. Do you think that the American people would rather us spend
this money on securing our ports, our chemical plants, our railroads,
our cities, or give it back as a tax break for the wealthiest
Americans? Given the choice, the American people said, let's make our
streets safer. I'm confident they think we should make the country
safer. This legislation will help take us down that path, and I urge my
colleagues to support it.
______
By Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
S. 2413. A bill to establish the Return of Talent Program to allow
aliens who are legally present in the United States to return
temporarily to the country of citizenship of the alien if that country
is engaged in post-conflict or natural disaster reconstruction, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, two of the greatest challenges we face
today are how to address the needs of post-conflict countries, and
countries that are suffering from large-scale natural disasters. These
are critical issues, and ones that we cannot afford to get
[[Page S2127]]
wrong--for the sake of the people living in those nations, and for the
sake of our own security.
On the post-conflict front, a 2004 commission organized by the Center
for Strategic and International Studies and the Association of the U.S.
Army found, to no one's surprise, that ``failed states matter--for
national security as well as for humanitarian reasons. If left to their
own devices, such states can become sanctuaries for terrorist networks,
organized crime and drug traffickers, as well as posing grave
humanitarian challenges and threats to regional stability.''
The most obvious case in point is the reconstruction of Iraq. I've
spent many hours on this floor, for three years, making clear that we
have to get it right in Iraq. And in addition to Iraq, unfortunately,
we can talk about many other states that are either unstable, or are
tenuously recovering from past conflicts including Liberia,
Afghanistan, East Timor, Kosovo, Haiti, and the Democratic Republic of
Congo.
Earthquakes, floods, drought and landslides often have the most dire
impacts in developing countries that are the least equipped to respond.
The countries ravaged by the 2004 tsunami are on a path to recovery,
but there is still a long way to go: Indonesia lost over 150,000
people, with half a million left homeless. In India, almost 20,000
people lost their lives and 2.79 million people were affected, losing
homes, land, and livestock. The tsunami set back the Maldives twenty
years in development, eviscerating the country's economic backbone and
tourism industry.
Recent years also saw devastating natural disasters in other parts of
the world. Earthquakes in Iran affected more than 30,000 people.
Catastrophic floods in Bangladesh left thousands dead and hundreds of
thousands homeless. Recurring droughts in Afghanistan left over 130,000
people--some 92 percent of the population--in need of food or aid.
We need comprehensive--and creative--strategies to address the need
to rebuild in countries on the rebound from conflicts or natural
disasters. One such strategy is to tap into the store of human as well
as financial resources here in the United States. We should allow, and
indeed encourage, immigrants to use their skills, talents, and
knowledge to help rebuild their native lands. In fact, the diaspora
presents one of the best collective resources that exists: these
individuals know the communities. They know the culture. They know the
language--more than any contractors and more than any humanitarian
workers from the outside, no matter how well trained or how much
expertise they may have.
So today, I am introducing legislation that would create a ``Return
of Talent'' visa program.
The idea is simple: a Return of Talent program would allow legal
immigrants in the United States to return home to help with
reconstruction efforts. ``Legal Permanent Residents'' will be able to
return temporarily to their countries after a conflict or a significant
natural disaster to help rebuild, without their time out of the United
States affecting their ability to meet the requirements for U.S.
citizenship.
Under current law, a Legal Permanent Resident who wants to apply for
U.S. citizenship is required to be physically present in the United
States for at least half of the five years immediately preceding the
date of filing the naturalization application.
This residency requirement could be particularly difficult to meet
for those who may have family and friends in their country of origin
who are in desperate need of help. We should not stand in their way of
returning, allowing them to bring their talent and expertise home,
helping them help others at a time of greatest need.
Press articles have highlighted stories of such individuals--
engineers, bankers, teachers and translators--who are willing to
contribute to reconstruction efforts. They simply cannot do so without
jeopardizing their immigration status.
This legislation would encourage those skilled and committed
individuals to return to their countries of origin to revive the
business, industry, agriculture, education, health and other sectors
that have been weakened or destroyed after years of conflict or
devastating disasters.
The Return of Talent program would include any individual who
demonstrates an ability and willingness to make a material contribution
to the post-conflict or natural disaster reconstruction in their
country of origin.
The program would apply to immigrants from countries where U.S. armed
forces have engaged in armed conflict or peacekeeping, or countries
where the United Nations Security Council has authorized peacekeeping
operations in the past ten years. Immigrants from countries which
received funding from the U.S. Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance
also would be eligible to participate in the program.
Estimates of individuals who could participate in this program are
relatively low. For example, the United States admitted 2,137 Afghani
and 3,494 Iraqi immigrants in 2004 who are now Legal Permanent
Residents eligible to pursue U.S. citizenship. Immigrants from
Indonesia numbered 2,418 and Bangladesh, 8,061 in the same year. Yet,
while the program would have a small impact on the U.S. naturalization
process, the contributions of even a few hundred individuals could have
a tremendous positive effect on reconstruction work.
In simple terms, a Return of Talent program makes sense. Everybody
wins: The United States is able to support badly needed rebuilding
efforts without increasing foreign aid; immigrants are able to use
their skills and resources to help communities without jeopardizing
their immigration status; and the people recovering from conflict and
disaster receive much-needed assistance.
A Return of Talent program is an important piece of our overall
strategy to stabilize and rebuild countries torn by conflict and
devastated by natural disaster. 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 text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2413
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 ``Return of Talent Act''.
SEC. 2. RETURN OF TALENT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Title III of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) is amended by
inserting after section 317 the following:
``TEMPORARY ABSENCE OF PERSONS PARTICIPATING IN THE RETURN OF TALENT
PROGRAM
``Sec. 317A. (a) In General.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall
establish the Return of Talent Program to permit eligible
aliens to temporarily return to the alien's country of
citizenship in order to make a material contribution to that
country if the country is engaged in post-conflict or natural
disaster reconstruction activities, for a period not
exceeding 24 months, unless an exception is granted under
subsection (d).
``(b) Eligible Alien.--An alien is eligible to participate
in the Return of Talent Program established under subsection
(a) if the alien meets the special immigrant description
under section 101(a)(27)(N).
``(c) Family Members.--The spouse, parents, siblings, and
any minor children of an alien who participates in the Return
of Talent Program established under subsection (a) may return
to such alien's country of citizenship with the alien and
reenter the United States with the alien.
``(d) Extension of Time.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security may extend the 24-month period referred to in
subsection (a) upon a showing that circumstances warrant that
an extension is necessary for post-conflict or natural
disaster reconstruction efforts.
``(e) Residency Requirements.--An immigrant described in
section 101(a)(27)(N) who participates in the Return of
Talent Program established under subsection (a), and the
spouse, parents, siblings, and any minor children who
accompany such immigrant to that immigrant's country of
citizenship, shall be considered, during such period of
participation in the program--
``(1) for purposes of section 316(a), physically present
and residing in the United States for purposes of
naturalization within the meaning of that section; and
``(2) for purposes of section 316(b), to meet the
continuous residency requirements in that section.
``(f) Oversight and Enforcement.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security, in consultation with the Secretary of State, shall
oversee and enforce the requirements of this section.''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.) is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 317
the following:
[[Page S2128]]
``317A. Temporary absence of persons participating in the Return of
Talent Program''.
SEC. 3. ELIGIBLE IMMIGRANTS.
Section 101(a)(27) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(27)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (L), by inserting a semicolon after
``Improvement Act of 1998'';
(2) in subparagraph (M), by striking the period and
inserting ``; or''; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(N) an immigrant who--
``(i) has been lawfully admitted to the United States for
permanent residence;
``(ii) demonstrates an ability and willingness to make a
material contribution to the post-conflict or natural
disaster reconstruction in the alien's country of
citizenship; and
``(iii) as determined by the Secretary of State in
consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security--
``(I) is a citizen of a country in which Armed Forces of
the United States are engaged, or have engaged in the 10
years preceding such determination, in combat or peacekeeping
operations;
``(II) is a citizen of a country where authorization for
United Nations peacekeeping operations was initiated by the
United Nations Security Council during the 10 years preceding
such determination; or
``(III) is a citizen of a country which received, during
the preceding 2 years, funding from the Office of Foreign
Disaster Assistance of the United States Agency for
International Development in response to a declared disaster
in such country by the United States Ambassador, the Chief of
the U.S. Mission, or the appropriate Assistant Secretary of
State, that is beyond the ability of such country's response
capacity and warrants a response by the United States
Government.''.
SEC. 4. REPORT TO CONGRESS.
Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with
the Secretary of State, shall submit a report to Congress
that describes--
(1) the countries of citizenship of the participants in the
Return of Talent Program established under section 2;
(2) the post-conflict or natural disaster reconstruction
efforts that benefitted, or were made possible, through
participation in the program; and
(3) any other information that the Secretary of Homeland
Security determines to be appropriate.
SEC. 5. REGULATIONS.
Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall promulgate
regulations to carry out this Act and the amendments made by
this Act.
SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Bureau of
Citizenship and Immigration Services for fiscal year 2007,
such sums as may be necessary to carry out this Act and the
amendments made by this Act.
______
By Mr. BAYH (for himself, Mr. Obama, Mr. Carper, and Mr. Kerry):
S. 2414. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to require
broker reporting of customer's basis in securities transactions, and
for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. OBAMA. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of a bill I am
proud to introduce today with Senators Bayh, Kerry, and Carper to help
close the tax gap by improving the reporting of capital gains income.
This bill requires brokerage firms and mutual fund companies to track
and report the adjusted cost basis of their clients' stock, bond, and
mutual fund investments.
This bill is a simple, commonsense solution to a serious problem.
Many taxpayers have a hard enough time filing their taxes. One of the
most complex parts of an individual's tax return is the schedule for
capital gains income. And what makes capital gains particularly
difficult is the challenge of figuring out the adjusted basis of a
security that has been sold.
Many taxpayers do not have the proper records or they don't know how
to calculate adjusted basis for a stock that has split or been
exchanged as part of a company's merger or acquisition. And right now,
the IRS does not have the ability to monitor the accuracy of taxpayer
calculations. As a result, there is a risk of error or fraud. In some
cases, taxpayers may end up paying too much in taxes. More often, they
report too little income and pay too little in taxes.
In 2001, the IRS estimated that underreporting cost the Treasury $11
billion annually. Today the loss is even greater.
Because the IRS fails to collect these funds, the taxes that the rest
of us have to pay are greater than they should be. Most people pay
their taxes honestly and follow the law to the best of their ability.
But a small number of tax frauds--who often owe great amounts of
taxes--cheat the system. And it's hard now for the IRS to stop them.
This bill makes it easier to stop them and it helps reduce the amount
of Federal tax dollars that the IRS fails to collect each year.
Brokerage firms and mutual fund companies will be required to keep
track of a taxpayer's cost basis and to report that information to the
IRS. This will make it easier for honest taxpayers to calculate their
taxable capital gain, and harder for dishonest ones to lie about it.
Based on information from the Taxpayer Advocate, reporting to the IRS
can improve compliance of capital gains reporting from an estimated 50
percent today to 90 percent.
Fortunately, this new reporting requirement will not pose an undue
burden to the financial firms affected. First, the firms will have
plenty of time to put the necessary systems in place since the
reporting requirement will not take effect until 2009, and then will
only apply to securities acquired starting in 2008. Second, technology
has made tracking by financial firms simple and efficient. More than 80
percent of all retail accounts already subscribe to a national
reporting service for transferring basis information at a nominal cost
per account. Finally, in cases where it is impossible to track basis,
the Treasury Secretary may develop regulations to require alternative
information.
It is estimated that $345 billion of Federal taxes goes uncollected
each year. This bill doesn't solve that full problem, but it is a step
in the right direction. It reduces the Federal deficit without raising
taxes or cutting spending. It simplifies the tax filing process and
reduces the chance of error or fraud. It applies what we know about the
benefits of automatic reporting to the IRS--which is required now for
wage income--to capital gains income as well.
This bill makes sense. It's good policy. I urge my colleagues to join
me in supporting it and to helping to improve our tax code.
____________________