[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 13 (Tuesday, January 23, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S912-S923]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. Smith):
S. 360. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand
expenses which qualify for the Hope Scholarship Credit and to make the
Hope Scholarship Credit and the Lifetime Learning Credit refundable; to
the Committee on Finance.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today with Senator Smith to
introduce the Greater Access To Education, or GATE Act, of 2007. This
legislation would amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 in order to
make college more affordable, and thus provide greater access to
postsecondary education for lower income students and working families.
Simply put, this bill would expand expenses which qualify for the Hope
Scholarship Credit, prevent aid for needy students from reducing the
credit, and make the Hope Scholarship and Lifetime Learning Credits
refundable.
The cost of attending college in the U.S. has grown by 44 percent
since 2000, far outpacing the median growth in income. We've seen a 35
percent jump in inflation-adjusted average tuition and fees for in-
state students at public colleges and universities since 2001-02. The
cost of going to college is 6.3 percent higher than just last year,
averaging $12,796 including room and board.
Unfortunately, year after year, Congress has failed to raise Pell
Grant Scholarships for needy students. This critical student aid has
been frozen at just over $4000 for four years. Ten years ago, the
maximum Pell Grant covered more than 50 percent of the cost of tuition,
fees, room and board at a public four-year college. Last year, it
covered only 35 percent of those costs.
At the same time, we're seeing increasing competition among colleges
and universities for the highest scoring students. And these students
command higher tuition discounts, particularly in the form of merit
scholarships. As a result, there's a smaller proportion of the
financial aid budget available for low income students at colleges with
rising tuitions.
A recent report by Education Trust found that many of the flagship
and research-extensive public universities have reallocated financial
aid resources away from the low income students who need help to go to
college--mostly to compete for high income students who would enroll in
college regardless of the amount of aid they receive. Between 1995 and
2003, flagship and other research-extensive public universities
actually decreased grant aid by 13 percent for students from families
with an annual income of $20,000 or less while they increased aid to
students from families who make more than $100,000 by 406 percent. In
2003, these institutions spent a combined $257 million to subsidize the
tuition of students from families with annual incomes over $100,000--a
staggering increase from the $50 million they spent in 1995.
In addition, many colleges and universities are now using
``enrollment and revenue management'' firms to help manage admissions
and financial aid. I am concerned that too many schools are trying to
leverage their financial aid to entice wealthier and high scoring
students to attend their schools, at the expense of aid to lower
[[Page S913]]
income students. In essence, they're directing financial aid dollars to
students who will increase a school's revenues and rankings.
As a result, low income students are disproportionately bearing the
brunt of increased college tuition and fees. In turn, more and more
students increasingly rely on loans to finance their education. And,
we've seen a significant increase in the amount of student debt in this
country. In New Mexico, the average student now graduates from 4 years
of college with more than $16,000 in debt.
And, last year, Congress cut $12 billion out of the Federal student
aid programs, pushing college further out of reach for American
families. It is the largest single cut the Federal Government has made
to student aid programs, and it is expected to increase the debt burden
of students and their families as many borrowers of student loans will
face higher interest payments.
Congress, simply, has moved in the wrong direction, and failed to
help make college more affordable for students from low income and
working families.
Full time students receive about $3,100 per year in aid in the form
of grants and tax benefits at 4-year public institutions. In 2003-04,
however, only 56 percent of 4-year public institution students from
families with incomes below $30,000 received sufficient grant aid and
tax benefits to cover tuition and fees.
Even worse, we know that each year there are hundreds of thousands of
students who are prepared to attend a 4-year college but do not do so
because of financial barriers.
We must reverse this course and make college more affordable for
students from low-income and working families.
The first priority for this Congress should be to increase student
aid for needy students. We must increase the amount of Pell grants to
at least $5,100.
The next thing we should do is make sure that the existing education
tax credits work effectively for the families that need them most. The
Hope Scholarship and Lifetime Learning tax credits have helped millions
of Americans finance their college education. For this tax year, the
credits allow eligible tax filers to reduce their tax liability by
receiving a credit of up to $1,650 for the Hope program or up to $2,000
for the Lifetime Learning credit for tuition and course-related fees
paid for a single student.
Unfortunately, research shows that these tax credits are not working
as effectively as they could be. They do not support students who are
currently enrolled in college to any significant degree, and they do
not induce greater numbers of students, including working adults who
need to upgrade their education and skills, to earn a postsecondary
degree.
Many students and their families are unable to take advantage of the
maximum amount of the credit because it is limited to covering
``tuition and related expenses.'' Students who attend colleges with
lower tuition costs, such as those attending community colleges, are
not entitled to the maximum amount of the credit.
For college students attending institutions with relatively high
tuition rates, the maximum credit will be available to cover the higher
tuition. This is not the case, however, for many students, particularly
the vast majority of community college students, as well as hundreds of
thousands of students attending public four-year colleges, who attend
college where the tuition is lower. These students are not able to
access the full credit because tuition at these institutions is lower
than the maximum credit, and the scope of the credit is limited to
tuition and related expenses. College students must pay for much more
than just tuition, however, including room and board, books, supplies,
equipment and fees.
Further, a student's eligibility for the Hope tax credit is actually
reduced by any grants the student receives--Federal, State, or private.
The impact of this limitation is felt particularly by the by the low
income students that receive Pell Grants or other Federal or State
assistance. Often, the assistance received fully offsets the amount of
the credit.
This legislation is simple and straightforward, and is crafted to
address these shortcomings. First, in addition to tuition, it allows
the Hope credit to cover room and board, required fees, books,
supplies, and equipment. It is important to note that the IRS Code
commonly recognizes non-tuition expenses, including substantial living
expenses, in programs such as Section 529 plans and tax-exempt, pre-
paid tuition plans.
As we all know, tuition is just one of the many expenses associated
with going to college. Room and board, books, supplies, equipment and
fees can be prohibitively expensive for those who attend colleges that
have reasonable tuition charges. The cost for books and supplies alone
can be as high as $1000 per year.
In addition, the legislation changes the IRS Code so that any Federal
Pell Grants and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants students
receive are not counted against their eligible expenses when Hope
eligibility is calculated. This change will provide some assistance to
needier students, especially those attending four-year public colleges.
But these fixes only get to a part of the problem. Because the
education tax credits are not refundable, a family of four must earn
above $30,000 to get the maximum credit. A student or working family
must have a positive tax liability to receive the credit. Nearly half
of all families with college students do not get the full credit
because their income is too low.
In fact, only 36 percent of filers claiming the credits at all had
incomes under $30,000; less than 10 percent of filers claiming the
credits had incomes under $15,000. By contrast, 36 percent of filers
claiming the credits earned $50,000 or more.
Making the credits refundable would ensure that families in lower tax
brackets are eligible for the maximum benefits and would thus make
college more affordable to those students and families who need the
most assistance.
I believe we all can agree that maintaining a skilled and educated
workforce should rank as one of our highest priorities. The National
Academy of Sciences projected that while the U.S. economy is doing well
today, current trends indicate that the U.S. may not fare as well in
the future, particularly in the areas of science and technology, where
innovation is spurred and high-wage jobs follow.
This Congress should do everything in its power to ensure that every
capable student who wants to go to college should be able to, which
will in turn ensure that we have workers to fill the high-quality,
high-wage jobs we are working so hard to create. I urge my colleagues
to support this critical legislation.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 360
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 ``Greater Access To Education
Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. EXPANSION OF EDUCATIONAL EXPENSES ALLOWED AS PART OF
HOPE SCHOLARSHIP CREDIT.
(a) Qualified Tuition and Related Expenses Expanded to
Include Room and Board, Books, Supplies, and Equipment.--
Paragraph (1) of section 25A(f) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (defining qualified tuition and related expenses) is
amended by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
``(D) Additional expenses allowed for hope scholarship
credit.--For purposes of the Hope Scholarship Credit, such
term shall, with respect to any academic period, include--
``(i) reasonable costs for such period incurred by the
eligible student for room and board while attending the
eligible educational institution, and
``(ii) fees, books, supplies, and equipment required for
such period for courses of instruction at the eligible
educational institution.''.
(b) Hope Scholarship Credit Not Reduced by Federal Pell
Grants and Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants.--
Subsection (g) of section 25A of such Code (relating to
special rules) is amended by adding at the end the following
new paragraph:
``(8) Pell and seog grants.--For purposes of the Hope
Scholarship Credit, paragraph (2) shall not apply to amounts
paid for an individual as a Federal Pell Grant or a Federal
supplemental educational opportunity grant
[[Page S914]]
under subparts 1 and 3, respectively, of part A of title IV
of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a and
1070b et seq., respectively).''.
(c) Expanded Hope Expenses Not Subject to Information
Reporting Requirements.--Subsection (e) of section 6050S of
such Code (relating to definitions) is amended by striking
``subsection (g)(2)'' and inserting ``subsections (f)(1)(D)
and (g)(2)''.
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to expenses paid after December 31, 2006 (in tax
years ending after such date), for education furnished in
academic periods beginning after such date.
SEC. 3. HOPE AND LIFETIME LEARNING CREDITS TO BE REFUNDABLE.
(a) Credit To Be Refundable.--Section 25A of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to Hope and Lifetime Learning
credits), as amended by section 2, is hereby moved to subpart
C of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of such Code
(relating to refundable credits) and inserted after section
35.
(b) Technical Amendments.--
(1) Section 36 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is
redesignated as section 37.
(2) Section 25A of such Code (as moved by subsection (a))
is redesignated as section 36.
(3) Paragraph (1) of section 36(a) of such Code (as
redesignated by paragraph (2)) is amended by striking ``this
chapter'' and inserting ``this subtitle''.
(4) Subparagraph (B) of section 72(t)(7) of such Code is
amended by striking ``section 25A(g)(2)'' and inserting
``section 36(g)(2)''.
(5) Subparagraph (A) of section 135(d)(2) of such Code is
amended by striking ``section 25A'' and inserting ``section
36''.
(6) Section 221(d) of such Code is amended--
(A) by striking ``section 25A(g)(2)'' in paragraph (2)(B)
and inserting ``section 36(g)(2)'',
(B) by striking ``section 25A(f)(2)'' in the matter
following paragraph (2)(B) and inserting ``section
36(f)(2)'', and
(C) by striking ``section 25A(b)(3)'' in paragraph (3) and
inserting ``section 36(b)(3)''.
(7) Section 222 of such Code is amended--
(A) by striking ``section 25A'' in subparagraph (A) of
subsection (c)(2) and inserting ``section 36'',
(B) by striking ``section 25A(f)'' in subsection (d)(1) and
inserting ``section 36(f)'', and
(C) by striking ``section 25A(g)(2)'' in subsection (d)(1)
and inserting ``section 36(g)(2)''.
(8) Section 529 of such Code is amended--
(A) by striking ``section 25A(g)(2)'' in subclause (I) of
subsection (c)(3)(B)(v) and inserting ``section 36(g)(2)'',
(B) by striking ``section 25A'' in subclause (II) of
subsection (c)(3)(B)(v) and inserting ``section 36'', and
(C) by striking ``section 25A(b)(3)'' in clause (i) of
subsection (e)(3)(B) and inserting ``section 36(b)(3)''.
(9) Section 530 of such Code is amended--
(A) by striking ``section 25A(g)(2)'' in subclause (I) of
subsection (d)(2)(C)(i) and inserting ``section 36(g)(2)'',
(B) by striking ``section 25A'' in subclause (II) of
subsection (d)(2)(C)(i) and inserting ``section 36'', and
(C) by striking ``section 25A(g)(2)'' in clause (iii) of
subsection (d)(4)(B) and inserting ``section 36(g)(2)''.
(10) Subsection (e) of section 6050S of such Code is
amended by striking ``section 25A'' and inserting ``section
36''.
(11) Subparagraph (J) of section 6213(g)(2) of such Code is
amended by striking ``section 25A(g)(1)'' and inserting
``section 36(g)(1)''.
(12) Paragraph (2) of section 1324(b) of title 31, United
States Code, is amended by inserting before the period ``or
from section 36 of such Code''.
(13) 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:
``Sec. 36. Hope and Lifetime Learning credits.
``Sec. 37. Overpayments of tax.''.
(14) The table of sections for subpart A of such part IV is
amended by striking the item relating to section 25A.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31,
2006.
______
By Mr. BINGAMAN. (for himself and Mr. Domenici):
S. 361. A bill to designate the United States courthouse at South
Federal Place in Santa Fe, New Mexico, as the ``Santiago E. Campos
United States Courthouse''; to the Committee on environment and Public
Works.
Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague Senator
Domenici to introduce a bill to designate the United States Courthouse
in Santa Fe, NM as the ``Honorable Santiago E. Campos United States
Courthouse.'' Santiago Campos was appointed to the Federal bench in
1978 by President Jimmy Carter and was the first Hispanic Federal judge
in New Mexico. He held the title of Chief U.S. District Judge from
February 5, 1987 to December 31, 1989 and took senior status in 1992.
Judge Campos was a dedicated and passionate public servant who spent
most of his life committed to working for the people of New Mexico and
our Nation. He served as a seaman first class in the United States Navy
from 1944 to 1946, as the Assistant Attorney General and then First
Assistant Attorney General of New Mexico from 1954 to 1957, and as a
district court judge from 1971 to 1978 in the First Judicial District
in the State of New Mexico. He was the prime mover in reestablishing
Federal court judicial activity in Santa Fe and had his chambers in the
courthouse there for over 22 years. For his dedication to the State,
Judge Campos received distinguished achievement awards in 1993 from
both the State Bar of New Mexico and the University of New Mexico.
Sadly, Judge Campos passed away January 20, 2001 after a long battle
with cancer. Judge Campos was an extraordinary jurist and served as a
role model and mentor to others in New Mexico. He was admired and
respected by all that knew him. I believe that it would be an
appropriate tribute to Judge Campos to have the courthouse in Santa Fe
bear his name.
The Senate passed a bill in the 108th Congress to name the same
courthouse for Judge Campos by unanimous consent. Unfortunately, the
House was unable to take up the measure and it failed to be signed into
law. I rise again to ask the Senate to pass the bill and honor the work
and dedication of Judge Santiago Campos.
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. 361
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.
The United States courthouse at South Federal Place in
Santa Fe, New Mexico, shall be known and designated as the
``Santiago E. Campos United States Courthouse''.
SEC. 2. REFERENCES.
Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,
or other record of the United States to the United States
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a
reference to the ``Santiago E. Campos United States
Courthouse''.
______
By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
S. 364. A bill to strengthen United States trade laws and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation
that will help America's manufacturers compete on even terms with
foreign manufacturers.
For generations, American manufacturing has been a tremendous source
of pride and a ladder to the middle class. Unfortunately, over the last
several years, the manufacturing sector of our economy has suffered
disproportionately and millions of good jobs have been lost. In my home
State of West Virginia, well over 10,000 manufacturing jobs have
disappeared since 2001. Workers and manufacturers in all of our States
have found it increasingly difficult to compete in today's global
markets, when the odds are stacked against them because of unfair
trading practices.
American industry can compete with anyone in the world when it's a
fair fight. Our domestic and international trade laws were set up to
establish a level playing field, but unfortunately some of our trading
partners have repeatedly found ways to circumvent these laws in order
to gain an unfair advantage in trade with the United States. This has
led to our record-breaking--and still growing--trade deficits, which
threaten the long-term health of our economy, and have contributed to
the migration of manufacturing jobs to factories overseas. This is an
enormous problem that the United States must face and conquer.
A large part of the problem in recent years is that the Bush
Administration has not been an aggressive enforcer of U.S. domestic
trade laws. It has also failed to successfully advocate for U.S.
interests in the multilateral dispute settlement setting. The bill I
introduce today, the Strengthening America's Trade Law Act of 2007,
will improve our ability to correct deficiencies in four areas of U.S.
trade policy: first, it will address problems in the U.S. approach to
the WTO Dispute Settlement process; second, it will strengthen
antidumping remedies, third, it will expand
[[Page S915]]
the reach of countervailing duties, and fourth, it will remove the
President's discretion to disregard the recommendations of the
International Trade Commission in certain circumstances.
The steel industry is perhaps the best-known example of how our trade
laws can help or hurt domestic industry when it is injured by unfair
foreign trade practices, but industries from timber to chinaware to
candlemaking are all too familiar with this point.
This bill contains a number of provisions that would provide
meaningful improvements to U.S. trade law. The United States would
remain fully compliant with its obligations in the World Trade
Organization under this legislation.
Let me briefly describe what this bill will do to level the playing
field for American manufacturers.
Title I of the Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act bolsters the
United States' position in WTO dispute settlement proceedings. The
dispute settlement system set up in 1994 upon the creation of the WTO
was intended to establish a rules-based system of enforcing trade
agreements. However, recent cases involving U.S. application of its
laws regarding import surges, anti-dumping and countervailing duties
have raised concerns about the fairness of the system.
To address these concerns, Title I allows the direct participation in
WTO dispute settlement proceedings of the U.S. business and trade
associations that are directly affected by these proceedings, which
would improve the prospects of zealous advocacy on behalf of U.S.
interests at stake. It also creates a Congressional Advisory Commission
on WTO Dispute Settlement that would analyze WTO decisions that are
adverse to the United States, report to Congress on the propriety of
the decisions and provide guidance for how the Congress might proceed
in responding to adverse decisions.
Title I also requires Congressional approval of all measures taken by
the U.S. government to comply with adverse decisions. In most cases,
compliance with an adverse WTO decision calls for legislative changes,
but in some cases such as the recent case involving ``zeroing'' on
dumping determinations, the Bush Administration has determined that the
United States can comply with the adverse decision through regulatory
changes such as altering the methodology through which the Commerce
Department calculates the dumping margin. This provision of my trade
bill would prevent the Administration from side-stepping Congress in
determining how to respond to an adverse decision in the WTO.
Congressional oversight is an important element of our trade policy,
and these provisions would help restore it.
Title II of the Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act tightens the
rules in anti-dumping cases in favor of the petitioning domestic
industry and makes it harder for dumping countries and businesses to
circumvent the rules. Additionally, it applies a stricter methodology
for determining the market value of goods from countries designated as
``nonmarket economies'' (NMEs). These countries presently include small
former Soviet republics such as Turkmenistan and Georgia, and also
large U.S. trading partners such as China. These NME designations are
an important element of U.S. trade policy, and Title II gives Congress
the ability to approve or disapprove any change in a country's NME
status.
Title II also overrules the recent decision by the Federal Circuit in
the Bratsk case, which inappropriately added a new requirement not
presently included in our anti-dumping laws, namely that ITC anti-
dumping investigations must include evaluating the role of imports that
are not actually subject to the investigation. This speculative element
is not part of the investigation process that Congress mandated the ITC
to follow in anti-dumping cases, and my bill would remove this
judicially-added requirement that was never a part of our trade remedy
law.
Title III of the Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act expands the
reach of countervailing duties (CVDs) in order to address two
significant sources of unfair trade: China's artificially undervalued
currency, and the disparate treatment that international trade rules
give to value-added taxes (VAT) used by most U.S. trade partners.
Unlike anti-dumping duties, CVDs have not been applied against
imports from NME countries like China, leaving a huge hole in the trade
remedies available to U.S. manufacturers who are competing against
subsidized imports from China. This bill explicitly makes CVDs
applicable to NME countries, and it and provides a methodology for
determining subsidy levels in NMEs that is similar to the methodology
for determining fair market value in anti-dumping investigations
regarding NME countries.
Next, Title III designates currency exchange rate manipulation as a
subsidy that can be addressed by application of CVDs. It is well known
that China's government pegs its currency's value to the value of a
``basket'' of currencies including the dollar rather than allowing the
value to be determined freely in currency exchange markets. This
practice keeps China's currency artificially low, boosting Chinese
exports and protecting Chinese domestic industry from imports. In
December, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke called this practice
what it is, an ``effective subsidy.'' This provision of Title III would
allow the U.S. government to apply our CVD law to this subsidy.
Title III also contains a vital provision that would lead to the
possible future use of CVDs as a remedy for the differential treatment
that international trade rules give to value-added taxes (VAT) used by
most U.S. trade partners. WTO rules provide that rebates on ``direct''
taxes such as income, employment, and real estate taxes constitute
subsidies, whereas rebates on ``indirect taxes'' such as sales and VAT
taxes are not subsidies. This puts U.S. producers at a significant
disadvantage to producers in countries that use value-added tax (VAT)
systems.
Over 135 U.S. trading partners use VAT taxes for a significant amount
of their revenue, and when U.S. exports enter a VAT tax country, they
are subject to the importing country's VAT tax, whereas U.S. imports
from a VAT tax country are not subject to the producing country's VAT
tax. This unfair tax treatment constitutes both a hidden import duty
for U.S. exports and a hidden export subsidy for VAT tax country
products entering the United States.
This provision of Title III would push the USTR to negotiate this
issue to a satisfactory conclusion within the next two years. Failing
such negotiations, it would designate this differential treatment a
countervailable subsidy which would then be subject to CVDs.
Finally, Title IV of the Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act would
remove Presidential discretion to ignore the recommendations of the ITC
in safeguard cases regarding China, or so-called ``Section 421'' cases.
Section 421 of the legislation that provided for China's accession to
the WTO is a ``safeguard'' provision that provides for temporary relief
from surges of imports that have caused injury to domestic industry.
There are a number of recent examples of President Bush's failure to
take action in cases in which the ITC has recommended ``safeguard''
relief most notably on December 30, 2005, when he denied the relief
that the ITC had recommended for U.S. steel pipe and tube manufacturers
in the face of a surge of imports from China. Title IV would ensure
that such denials do not happen in the future by removing Presidential
discretion in applying safeguard measures in cases involving imports
from China and instead making the findings and recommendations of the
ITC the final word on the matter.
The Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act will provide meaningful
improvements to U.S. trade law and a more level playing field for U.S.
workers and manufacturers in an increasingly competitive global
economy. I commend it to my colleagues and urge them to join me in
pushing for its swift enactment. Congress has sat on the sidelines for
too long as our country's finest manufacturers have been dealt blow
after blow. This bill will not solve the trade deficit alone, but it is
a reasonable start.
I am going to ask my leadership, in my caucus and on the Finance
Committee, to work with me on this legislation, and I look forward to
joining
[[Page S916]]
forces with my allies on the other side of the aisle to move this bill.
I ask unanimous consent that the bill be entered into the record. 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. 364
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the
``Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
TITLE I--DISPUTE SETTLEMENT
Subtitle A--Findings, Purpose, and Definitions
Sec. 101. Congressional findings and purpose.
Sec. 102. Definitions.
Subtitle B--Participation in WTO Panel Proceedings
Sec. 111. Participation in WTO panel proceedings.
Subtitle C--Congressional Advisory Commission on WTO Dispute Settlement
Sec. 121. Establishment of Commission.
Sec. 122. Duties of the Commission.
Sec. 123. Powers of the Commission.
Subtitle D--Congressional Approval of Regulatory Action Relating to
Adverse WTO Decisions
Sec. 131. Congressional approval of regulatory actions relating to
adverse WTO decisions.
Subtitle E--Clarification of Rights and Obligations Through
Negotiations
Sec. 141. Clarification of rights and obligations in the WTO through
negotiations.
TITLE II--STRENGTHENING ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY LAWS
Sec. 201. Prevention of circumvention.
Sec. 202. Export price and constructed export price.
Sec. 203. Nonmarket economy methodology.
Sec. 204. Determinations on the basis of facts available.
Sec. 205. Clarification of determination of material injury.
Sec. 206. Revocation of nonmarket economy country status.
TITLE III--EXPANSION OF APPLICABILITY OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
Sec. 301. Application of countervailing duties to nonmarket economies
and strengthening application of the law.
Sec. 302. Treatment of exchange-rate manipulation as countervailable
subsidy under title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930.
Sec. 303. Affirmation of negotiating objective on border taxes.
Sec. 304. Presidential certification; application of countervailing
duty law.
TITLE IV--LIMITATION ON PRESIDENTIAL DISCRETION IN ADDRESSING MARKET
DISRUPTION
Sec. 401. Action to address market disruption.
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS
Sec. 501. Application to Canada and Mexico.
TITLE I--DISPUTE SETTLEMENT
Subtitle A--Findings, Purpose, and Definitions
SEC. 101. CONGRESSIONAL FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
(1) The United States joined the World Trade Organization
as an original member with the goal of creating an improved
global trading system and providing expanded economic
opportunities for United States workers, farmers, and
businesses.
(2) The dispute settlement rules of the WTO were created to
enhance the likelihood that governments will observe their
WTO obligations.
(3) Successful operation of the WTO dispute settlement
system was critical to congressional approval of the Uruguay
Round Agreements and is critical to continued support by the
United States for the WTO. In particular, it is imperative
that dispute settlement panels and the Appellate Body--
(A) operate with fairness and in an impartial manner;
(B) strictly observe the terms of reference and any
applicable standard of review set forth in the Uruguay Round
Agreements; and
(C) not add to the obligations, or diminish the rights, of
WTO members under the Uruguay Round Agreements in violation
of Articles 3.2 and 19.2 of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding.
(4) An increasing number of reports by dispute settlement
panels and the Appellate Body have raised serious concerns
within the Congress about the ability of the WTO dispute
settlement system to operate in accordance with paragraph
(3).
(5) In particular, several reports of dispute settlement
panels and the Appellate Body have added to the obligations
and diminished the rights of WTO members, particularly under
the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, the Agreement on
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, and the Agreement on
Safeguards.
(6) In order to come into compliance with reports of
dispute settlement panels and the Appellate Body that have
been adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body, the Congress may
need to amend or repeal statutes of the United States. In
such cases, the Congress must have a high degree of
confidence that the reports are in accordance with paragraph
(3).
(7) The Congress needs impartial, objective, and juridical
advice to determine the appropriate response to reports of
dispute settlement panels and the Appellate Body.
(8) The United States remains committed to the
multilateral, rules-based trading system.
(b) Purpose.--It is the purpose of this subtitle to provide
for the establishment of the Congressional Advisory
Commission on WTO Dispute Settlement to provide objective and
impartial advice to the Congress on the operation of the
dispute settlement system of the World Trade Organization.
SEC. 102. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Adverse finding.--The term ``adverse finding'' means--
(A) in a proceeding of a dispute settlement panel or the
Appellate Body that is initiated against the United States, a
finding by the panel or the Appellate Body that any law,
regulation, practice, or interpretation of the United States,
or any State, is inconsistent with the obligations of the
United States under a Uruguay Round Agreement (or nullifies
or impairs benefits accruing to a WTO member under such an
Agreement); or
(B) in a proceeding of a panel or the Appellate Body in
which the United States is a complaining party, any finding
by the panel or the Appellate Body that a measure of the
party complained against is not inconsistent with that
party's obligations under a Uruguay Round Agreement (or does
not nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States
under such an Agreement).
(2) Appellate body.--The term ``Appellate Body'' means the
Appellate Body established by the Dispute Settlement Body
pursuant to Article 17.1 of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding.
(3) Appropriate congressional committees.--The term
``appropriate congressional committees'' means the Committee
on Finance of the Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means
of the House of Representatives.
(4) Dispute settlement body.--The term ``Dispute Settlement
Body'' means the Dispute Settlement Body established pursuant
to the Dispute Settlement Understanding.
(5) Dispute settlement panel; panel.--The terms ``dispute
settlement panel'' and ``panel'' mean a panel established
pursuant to Article 6 of the Dispute Settlement
Understanding.
(6) Dispute settlement understanding.--The term ``Dispute
Settlement Understanding'' means the Understanding on Rules
and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes referred
to in section 101(d)(16) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(19 U.S.C. 3511(d)(16)).
(7) Terms of reference.--The term ``terms of reference''
has the meaning given that term in the Dispute Settlement
Understanding.
(8) Trade representative.--The term ``Trade
Representative'' means the United States Trade
Representative.
(9) United states person.--The term ``United States
person'' means--
(A) a United States citizen or an alien admitted for
permanent residence into the United States; and
(B) a corporation, partnership, labor organization, or
other legal entity organized under the laws of the United
States or of any State, the District of Columbia, or any
commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.
(10) Uruguay round agreement.--The term ``Uruguay Round
Agreement'' means any of the Agreements described in section
101(d) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.
(11) World trade organization; wto.--The terms ``World
Trade Organization'' and ``WTO'' mean the organization
established pursuant to the WTO Agreement.
(12) WTO agreement.--The term ``WTO Agreement'' means the
Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization entered
into on April 15, 1994.
(13) WTO member.--The term ``WTO member'' has the meaning
given that term in section 2(10) of the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(10)).
Subtitle B--Participation in WTO Panel Proceedings
SEC. 111. PARTICIPATION IN WTO PANEL PROCEEDINGS.
(a) In General.--If the Trade Representative, in
proceedings before a dispute settlement panel or the
Appellate Body of the WTO, seeks--
(1) to enforce United States rights under a multilateral
trade agreement, or
(2) to defend an action or determination of the United
States Government that is challenged,
a United States person that is supportive of the United
States Government's position before the panel or Appellate
Body and that has a direct economic interest in the panel's
or Appellate Body's resolution of the matters in dispute
shall be permitted to participate in consultations and panel
or Appellate Body proceedings. The Trade Representative shall
issue regulations, consistent with subsections (b) and (c),
ensuring full and effective participation by any such person.
[[Page S917]]
(b) Access to Information.--The Trade Representative shall
make available to persons described in subsection (a) all
information presented to or otherwise obtained by the Trade
Representative in connection with the WTO dispute settlement
proceeding in which such persons are participating. The Trade
Representative shall promulgate regulations to protect
information designated as confidential in the proceeding.
(c) Participation in Panel Process.--Upon request from a
person described in subsection (a), the Trade Representative
shall--
(1) consult in advance with such person regarding the
content of written submissions from the United States to the
panel or Appellate Body concerned or to the other member
countries involved;
(2) include, if appropriate, such person or the person's
appropriate representative as an advisory member of the
delegation in sessions of the dispute settlement panel or
Appellate Body;
(3) allow such person, if such person would bring special
knowledge to the proceeding, to appear before the panel or
Appellate Body, directly or through counsel, under the
supervision of responsible United States Government
officials; and
(4) in proceedings involving confidential information,
allow the appearance of such person only through counsel as a
member of the special delegation.
Subtitle C--Congressional Advisory Commission on WTO Dispute Settlement
SEC. 121. ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION.
(a) Establishment.--There is established a commission to be
known as the Congressional Advisory Commission on WTO Dispute
Settlement (in this subtitle referred to as the
``Commission'').
(b) Membership.--
(1) Composition.--The Commission shall be composed of 5
members, all of whom shall be judges or former judges of the
Federal judicial circuits and shall be appointed by the
Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro
tempore of the Senate after considering the recommendations
of the Chairman and ranking member of each of the appropriate
congressional committees. Commissioners shall be chosen
without regard to political affiliation and solely on the
basis of each Commissioner's fitness to perform the duties of
a Commissioner.
(2) Date.--The appointments of the initial members of the
Commission shall be made not later than 90 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act.
(c) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--
(1) In general.--Members of the Commission shall each be
appointed for a term of 5 years, except that of the members
first appointed, 3 members shall each be appointed for a term
of 3 years.
(2) Vacancies.--
(A) In general.--Any vacancy on the Commission shall not
affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner in
which the original appointment was made and shall be subject
to the same conditions as the original appointment.
(B) Unexpired term.--An individual chosen to fill a vacancy
shall be appointed for the unexpired term of the member
replaced.
(d) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 30 days after the date
on which all members of the Commission have been appointed,
the Commission shall hold its first meeting.
(e) Meetings.--Except for the initial meeting, the
Commission shall meet at the call of the Chairperson.
(f) Quorum.--A majority of the members of the Commission
shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may
hold hearings.
(g) Chairperson and Vice Chairperson.--The Commission shall
select a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson from among its
members.
(h) Funding.--Members of the Commission shall be allowed
travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence at
rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I
of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from
their homes or regular places of business in the performance
of services for the Commission.
SEC. 122. DUTIES OF THE COMMISSION.
(a) Advising the Congress on the Operation of the WTO
Dispute Settlement System.--
(1) In general.--The Commission shall review--
(A) all adverse findings that are--
(i) adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body; and
(ii) the result of a proceeding initiated against the
United States by a WTO member; and
(B) upon the request of either of the appropriate
congressional committees--
(i) any adverse finding of a dispute settlement panel or
the Appellate Body--
(I) that is adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body; and
(II) in which the United States is a complaining party; or
(ii) any other finding that is contained in a report of a
dispute settlement panel or the Appellate Body that is
adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body.
(2) Scope of review.--The Commission shall advise the
Congress in connection with each adverse finding under
paragraph (1)(A) or (1)(B)(i) or other finding under
paragraph (1)(B)(ii) on--
(A) whether the dispute settlement panel or the Appellate
Body, as the case may be--
(i) exceeded its authority or its terms of reference;
(ii) added to the obligations, or diminished the rights, of
the United States under the Uruguay Round Agreement that is
the subject of the finding;
(iii) acted arbitrarily or capriciously, engaged in
misconduct, or demonstrably departed from the procedures
specified for panels and the Appellate Body in the applicable
Uruguay Round Agreement; or
(iv) deviated from the applicable standard of review,
including in antidumping, countervailing duty, and other
trade remedy cases, the standard of review set forth in
Article 17.6 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article VI
of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994;
(B) whether the finding is consistent with the original
understanding by the United States of the Uruguay Round
Agreement that is the subject of the finding as explained in
the statement of administrative action approved under section
101(a) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C.
3511(a)); and
(C) what actions, if any, the United States should take in
response to the finding, including any proposals to amend,
rescind, or otherwise modify a law, regulation, practice, or
interpretation of the United States.
(3) No deference.--In advising the Congress under paragraph
(2), the Commission shall not accord deference to findings of
law made by the dispute settlement panel or the Appellate
Body, as the case may be.
(b) Determination; Report.--
(1) Determination.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 150 days after the date on
which the Commission receives notice of a report or request
under section 123(b), the Commission shall make a written
determination with respect to the matters described in
paragraph (2) of subsection (a), including a full analysis of
the basis for its determination. A vote by a majority of the
members of the Commission shall constitute a determination of
the Commission, although the members need not agree on the
basis for their vote.
(B) Dissenting or concurring opinions.--Any member of the
Commission who disagrees with a determination of the
Commission or who concurs in such a determination on a basis
different from that of the Commission or other members of the
Commission, may write an opinion expressing such disagreement
or concurrence, as the case may be.
(2) Report.--The Commission shall promptly report the
determinations described in paragraph (1)(A) to the
appropriate congressional committees. The Commission shall
include with the report any opinions written under paragraph
(1)(B) with respect to the determination.
(c) Availability to the Public.--Each report of the
Commission under subsection (b)(2), together with the
opinions included with the report, shall be made available to
the public.
SEC. 123. POWERS OF THE COMMISSION.
(a) Hearings.--The Commission may hold a public hearing to
solicit views concerning an adverse finding or other finding
described in section 122(a)(1), if the Commission considers
such hearing to be necessary to carry out the purpose of this
subtitle. The Commission shall provide reasonable notice of a
hearing held pursuant to this subsection.
(b) Information From Interested Parties and Federal
Agencies.--
(1) Notice to commission.--
(A) Under section 122(a)(1)(A).--The Trade Representative
shall advise the Commission not later than 5 business days
after the date the Dispute Settlement Body adopts an adverse
finding that is to be reviewed by the Commission under
section 122(a)(1)(A).
(B) Under section 122(a)(1)(B).--Either of the appropriate
congressional committees may make and notify the Commission
of a request under section 122(a)(1)(B) not later than 1 year
after the Dispute Settlement Body adopts the adverse finding
or other finding that is the subject of the request.
(C) Findings adopted prior to appointment of commission.--
With respect to any adverse finding or other finding to which
section 122(a)(1)(B) applies and that is adopted before the
date on which the first members of the Commission are
appointed under section 121(b)(2), either of the appropriate
congressional committees may make and notify the Commission
of a request under section 122(a)(1)(B) with respect to the
adverse finding or other finding not later than 1 year after
the date on which the first members of the Commission are
appointed under section 121(b)(2).
(2) Submissions and requests for information.--
(A) In general.--The Commission shall promptly publish in
the Federal Register notice of--
(i) the notice received under paragraph (1) from the Trade
Representative or either of the appropriate congressional
committees; and
(ii) an opportunity for interested parties to submit
written comments to the Commission.
(B) Comments available to public.--The Commission shall
make comments submitted pursuant to subparagraph (A)(ii)
available to the public.
(C) Information from federal agencies and departments.--The
Commission may secure directly from any Federal department or
agency such information as the Commission considers necessary
to carry out the provisions of this subtitle. Upon the
request of the chairperson of the Commission, the
[[Page S918]]
head of such department or agency shall furnish the
information requested to the Commission in a timely manner.
(3) Access to panel and appellate body documents.--
(A) In general.--The Trade Representative shall make
available to the Commission all submissions and relevant
documents relating to an adverse finding described in section
122(a)(1), including any information contained in such
submissions and relevant documents identified by the provider
of the information as proprietary information or information
designated as confidential by a foreign government.
(B) Public access.--Any document that the Trade
Representative submits to the Commission shall be available
to the public, except information that is identified as
proprietary or confidential or the disclosure of which would
otherwise violate the rules of the WTO.
(c) Assistance From Federal Agencies; Confidentiality.--
(1) Administrative assistance.--Any agency or department of
the United States that is designated by the President shall
provide administrative services, funds, facilities, staff, or
other support services to the Commission to assist the
Commission with the performance of the Commission's
functions.
(2) Confidentiality.--
(A) Documents and information from agencies.--The
Commission shall protect from disclosure any document or
information submitted to it by a department or agency of the
United States that the agency or department requests be kept
confidential.
(B) Disclosure of documents and information of
commission.--The Commission shall not be considered to be an
agency for purposes of section 552 of title 5, United States
Code.
Subtitle D--Congressional Approval of Regulatory Action Relating to
Adverse WTO Decisions
SEC. 131. CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL OF REGULATORY ACTIONS
RELATING TO ADVERSE WTO DECISIONS.
(a) In General.--Section 123(g) of the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3533(g)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)--
(A) in subparagraph (E), by striking ``and'';
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (F) as subparagraph (H);
and
(C) by inserting after subparagraph (E) the following new
subparagraphs:
``(F) the appropriate congressional committees have
received the report on the determinations of the
Congressional Advisory Commission on WTO Dispute Settlement
under section 122(b)(2) of the Strengthening America's Trade
Laws Act with respect to the relevant dispute settlement
panel or Appellate Body decision;
``(G) a joint resolution, described in paragraph (2),
approving the proposed modification or final rule is enacted
into law after the appropriate congressional committees
receive the report on the determinations of the Congressional
Advisory Commission on WTO Dispute Settlement under section
122(b)(2) of the Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act;
and''; and
(2) by amending paragraph (2) to read as follows:
``(2) Joint resolution to approve modification in agency
regulation or practice.--
``(A) In general.--For the purposes of paragraph (1)(G), a
joint resolution is a joint resolution of the 2 Houses of the
Congress, the matter after the resolving clause of which is
as follows: `That the Congress approves the modifications to
the regulation or practice of the United States proposed in a
report submitted to the Congress under subparagraph (D) or
(F) of section 123(g)(1) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(19 U.S.C. 3533(g)(1) (D) and (F)) on _______, relating to
______ .', with the first blank space being filled with the
date on which the report is submitted to the Congress and the
second blank space being filled with the specific
modification proposed to the regulation or practice of the
United States.
``(B) Procedural provisions.--The procedural provisions of
subsections (d) through (i) of section 206 of the
Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act shall apply to a joint
resolution described in subparagraph (A).''.
(b) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
(2) Modifications made between january 1, 2007 and the date
of the enactment of this act.--
(A) In general.--Modifications to any regulation or
practice of a department or agency of the United States made
pursuant to the provisions of section 123(g) of the Uruguay
Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3533(g)) that became
effective on or after January 1, 2007, and before the date of
the enactment of this Act, shall be suspended upon the
enactment of this Act and have no effect.
(B) Approval of modifications.--On or after the date of the
enactment of this Act, the Trade Representative and the head
of the department or agency within whose jurisdiction the
modification described in subparagraph (A) falls may seek
approval of such modification pursuant to the procedures set
out in section 123(g)(1) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
(19 U.S.C. 3533(g)(1)), as amended by subsection (a).
Subtitle E--Clarification of Rights and Obligations Through
Negotiations
SEC. 141. CLARIFICATION OF RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS IN THE WTO
THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS.
(a) In General.--After an adverse finding, the United
States shall work within the World Trade Organization to
obtain clarification of the Uruguay Round Agreement to which
the adverse finding applies to conform the Agreement to the
understanding of the United States regarding the rights and
obligations of the United States and shall not modify the
law, regulation, practice, or interpretation of the United
States in response to the adverse finding if--
(1) the United States has stated at the Dispute Settlement
Body that the adverse finding has created obligations never
agreed to by the United States;
(2) either of the appropriate congressional committees by
resolution finds that the adverse finding has created
obligations never agreed to by the United States; or
(3) the Congressional Advisory Commission on WTO Dispute
Resolution makes a determination under section
122(a)(2)(A)(ii) that the adverse finding has created
obligations never agreed to by the United States.
(b) Applicability.--
(1) In general.--This section shall apply to any adverse
finding on or after January 1, 2002.
(2) Effect on modification of regulation, practice, or
interpretation adopted before enactment of this act.--
(A) In general.--Any agency that modified a regulation,
practice, or interpretation in response to an adverse finding
between January 1, 2002 and the date of the enactment of this
Act shall provide notice that the modification shall cease to
have force and effect on the date that is 30 days after the
date of the enactment of this Act and such modification shall
cease to have force and effect on such date.
(B) Applicability in trade remedy cases.--The cessation of
the force and effect of the modification described in
subparagraph (A) shall apply with respect to--
(i) investigations initiated--
(I) on the basis of petitions filed under section 702(b),
732(b), or 783(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1671a(b), 1673a(b), and 1677n(a)) or section 202(a), 221,
251(a), or 292(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2252(a), 2271, 2341(a), and 2401a(a)) after the date on which
the modification ceases to have force and effect under
subparagraph (A);
(II) by the administering authority under section 702(a) or
732(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671a(a) and
1673a(a)) after such date; or
(III) under section 753 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1675b) after such date;
(ii) reviews initiated under section 751 of the Tariff Act
of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675)--
(I) by the administering authority or the International
Trade Commission on their own initiative after such date; or
(II) pursuant to a request filed after such date; and
(iii) all proceedings conducted under section 129 of the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3538) commenced after
such date.
(3) Effect on prior statutory changes.--
(A) In general.--Paragraph (2)(A) shall not apply to
modifications to statutes of the United States made in
response to adverse findings.
(B) Clarification of united states rights.--If a statute of
the United States has been modified in response to an adverse
finding, the United States shall obtain clarification of the
rights and obligations of the United States affected by the
adverse finding pursuant to subsection (a).
TITLE II--STRENGTHENING ANTIDUMPING AND COUNTERVAILING DUTY LAWS
SEC. 201. PREVENTION OF CIRCUMVENTION.
Section 781(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677j(c)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(3) Special rule.--The administering authority may
exclude altered merchandise from the class or kind of
merchandise subject to an investigation and order or finding
described in paragraph (1), if such exclusion is not
inconsistent with the affirmative determination of the
Commission on which the order or finding is based.''.
SEC. 202. EXPORT PRICE AND CONSTRUCTED EXPORT PRICE.
Section 772(c)(2)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677a(c)(2)(A)) is amended by inserting ``(including
antidumping and countervailing duties imposed under this
title)'' after ``duties''.
SEC. 203. NONMARKET ECONOMY METHODOLOGY.
Section 773(c)(4) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677b(c)(4)) is amended to read as follows:
``(4) Valuation of factors of production.--
``(A) In general.--The administering authority, in valuing
factors of production under paragraph (1), shall utilize, to
the extent possible, the prices or costs of factors of
production in one or more market economy countries that are--
``(i) at a level of economic development comparable to that
of the nonmarket economy country; and
``(ii) significant producers of comparable merchandise.
[[Page S919]]
In this paragraph, the term `surrogate' refers to the values,
calculations, and market economy countries used under this
subparagraph.
``(B) Valuing materials used in production.--In determining
the value of materials used in production under subparagraph
(A), the following applies:
``(i) The administering authority may use the value of
inputs that are purchased from market economy suppliers and
are not suspected of being dumped or subsidized, only for the
quantity of such purchases.
``(ii) All materials purchased or otherwise obtained from
nonmarket economy countries shall be valued using surrogate
values under subparagraph (A).
``(iii) A purchased material shall be viewed as suspected
of being subsidized if there are any affirmative findings by
the United States or another WTO member of export subsidy
programs in the supplying country.
``(iv) A purchased material shall be viewed as suspected of
being dumped if there are any affirmative findings by the
United States or other WTO member of dumping in the general
category of merchandise, or if information supplied by the
petitioner or otherwise of record suggests significant
underpricing to the purchaser in the nonmarket economy
country.
``(v) Surrogate values for materials from a market economy
country shall be disregarded as not reflective of prices in
that surrogate market only if prices in that market are
viewed as aberrational, such as a case in which prices
undersell or exceed any reported price in that surrogate
market by a large amount.
``(vi) There shall be a presumption that the administering
authority will include all market prices from a surrogate
market. Prices that are high or low shall be excluded only
when it is demonstrated that the prices are not reflective of
prices in the surrogate country for the relevant category of
merchandise.
``(vii) If amounts pertaining to the cost of production of
imports into a surrogate country from market economy
suppliers are used for valuing the materials used, such
amounts shall be valued on the basis of CIF (cost, insurance,
and freight), plus duties paid, to provide a proxy for prices
in the surrogate country competing with locally produced
goods. Such values shall not be reduced by the import duties.
``(C) Valuing labor.--
``(i) The administering authority may use an average of
wage rates for market economies, but shall ensure that labor
rates used fully reflect all labor costs, including benefits,
health care, and pension costs.
``(ii) Labor shall be the total labor employed by a
nonmarket economy country producer or used by a nonmarket
economy country producer in the overall business, with
allocations to other merchandise produced or sold by that
producer that is not subject merchandise.
``(iii) Labor shall reflect the average labor for all other
producers in the nonmarket economy country that are producing
the particular merchandise subject to investigation or
review, and shall not be limited to operations used for
export.
``(D) Valuing factory overhead, general selling and
administrative expenses, and profit.--
``(i) In general.--The administering authority shall use
the best information available with respect to likely values
of factory overhead, general selling and administrative
expenses, and profit from a surrogate country. If the values
determined under subparagraphs (B) and (C) for materials used
and labor consumed result in amounts that are demonstrably
larger or smaller than the amounts used in determining
surrogate ratios from financial or other reports from a
surrogate country, adjustments shall be made to the ratios to
reflect fully the level of such costs and profits in the
surrogate country on a per item produced basis.
``(ii) Ratios defined.--For purposes of this subparagraph,
the term `ratios' means--
``(I) the ratio of factory overhead to labor, materials,
and energy;
``(II) the ratio of general selling and administrative
costs to factory overhead, labor, materials, and energy; and
``(III) the ratio of profit to general selling and
administrative costs, factory overhead, labor, materials, and
energy.
``(E) Use of confidential information from a foreign
producer in a surrogate country.--The administering authority
shall generally use publicly available information to value
factors of production, except that, in a case in which any
foreign producer in the surrogate country that is willing to
provide information to the administering authority on factors
of production to produce the same class of merchandise and
such information is subject to verification, the
administering authority shall accept and use such
information. The relationship of the foreign producer
providing the information to a party to the proceeding shall
not be a basis for disqualification.''.
SEC. 204. DETERMINATIONS ON THE BASIS OF FACTS AVAILABLE.
Section 776(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677e(a)(2)(B)) is amended to read as follows:
``(B) fails to provide such information by the deadline for
submission of the information or in the form and manner
required, and in conformity with prior administering
authority determinations in the proceeding and final judicial
decisions in the proceeding, subject to subsections (c)(1)
and (e) of section 782,''.
SEC. 205. CLARIFICATION OF DETERMINATION OF MATERIAL INJURY.
Section 771(7) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677(7)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
subparagraph:
``(J) Clarification of determination of material injury.--
In determining if there is material injury, or threat of
material injury, by reason of imports of the subject
merchandise, the Commission shall make the Commission's
determination without regard to--
``(i) whether other imports are likely to replace subject
merchandise, or
``(ii) the effect of a potential order on the domestic
industry.''.
SEC. 206. REVOCATION OF NONMARKET ECONOMY COUNTRY STATUS.
(a) Amendment of Definition of ``Nonmarket Economy
Country''.--Section 771(18)(C)(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930
(19 U.S.C. 1677(18)(C)(i)) is amended to read as follows:
``(i) Any determination that a foreign country is a
nonmarket economy country shall remain in effect until--
``(I) the administering authority makes a final
determination to revoke the determination under subparagraph
(A); and
``(II) a joint resolution is enacted into law pursuant to
section 206 of the Strengthening America's Trade Laws Act.''.
(b) Notification by President; Joint Resolution.--Whenever
the administering authority makes a final determination under
section 771(18)(C)(i)(I) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677(18)(C)(i)(I)) to revoke the determination that a foreign
country is a nonmarket economy country--
(1) the President shall notify the Committee on Finance of
the Senate and the Committee on Ways and Means of the House
of Representatives of that determination not later than 10
days after the publication of the administering authority's
final determination in the Federal Register;
(2) the President shall transmit to the Congress a request
that a joint resolution be introduced pursuant to this
section; and
(3) a joint resolution shall be introduced in the Congress
pursuant to this section.
(c) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term
``joint resolution'' means only a joint resolution of the 2
Houses of the Congress, the matter after the resolving clause
of which is as follows: ``That the Congress approves the
change of nonmarket economy status with respect to the
products of _____ transmitted by the President to the
Congress on _____.'', the first blank space being filled in
with the name of the country with respect to which a
determination has been made under section 771(18)(C)(i) of
the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677(18)(C)(i)), and the
second blank space being filled with the date on which the
President notified the Committee on Finance of the Senate and
the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of
Representatives under subsection (b)(1).
(d) Introduction.--A joint resolution shall be introduced
(by request) in the House by the majority leader of the
House, for himself, or by Members of the House designated by
the majority leader of the House, and shall be introduced (by
request) in the Senate by the majority leader of the Senate,
for himself, or by Members of the Senate designated by the
majority leader of the Senate.
(e) Amendments Prohibited.--No amendment to a joint
resolution shall be in order in either the House of
Representatives or the Senate, and no motion to suspend the
application of this subsection shall be in order in either
House, nor shall it be in order in either House for the
presiding officer to entertain a request to suspend the
application of this subsection by unanimous consent.
(f) Period for Committee and Floor Consideration.--
(1) In general.--If the committee or committees of either
House to which a joint resolution has been referred have not
reported the joint resolution at the close of the 45th day
after its introduction, such committee or committees shall be
automatically discharged from further consideration of the
joint resolution and it shall be placed on the appropriate
calendar. A vote on final passage of the joint resolution
shall be taken in each House on or before the close of the
15th day after the joint resolution is reported by the
committee or committees of that House to which it was
referred, or after such committee or committees have been
discharged from further consideration of the joint
resolution. If, prior to the passage by one House of a joint
resolution of that House, that House receives the same joint
resolution from the other House, then--
(A) the procedure in that House shall be the same as if no
joint resolution had been received from the other House, but
(B) the vote on final passage shall be on the joint
resolution of the other House.
(2) Computation of days.--For purposes of paragraph (1), in
computing a number of days in either House, there shall be
excluded any day on which that House is not in session.
(g) Floor Consideration in the House.--
(1) Motion privileged.--A motion in the House of
Representatives to proceed to the consideration of a joint
resolution shall be highly privileged and not debatable. An
amendment to the motion shall not be in order, nor shall it
be in order to move to reconsider the vote by which the
motion is agreed to or disagreed to.
(2) Debate limited.--Debate in the House of Representatives
on a joint resolution shall be limited to not more than 20
hours, which
[[Page S920]]
shall be divided equally between those favoring and those
opposing the joint resolution. A motion further to limit
debate shall not be debatable. It shall not be in order to
move to recommit a joint resolution or to move to reconsider
the vote by which a joint resolution is agreed to or
disagreed to.
(3) Motions to postpone.--Motions to postpone, made in the
House of Representatives with respect to the consideration of
a joint resolution, and motions to proceed to the
consideration of other business, shall be decided without
debate.
(4) Appeals.--All appeals from the decisions of the Chair
relating to the application of the Rules of the House of
Representatives to the procedure relating to a joint
resolution shall be decided without debate.
(5) Other rules.--Except to the extent specifically
provided in the preceding provisions of this subsection,
consideration of a joint resolution shall be governed by the
Rules of the House of Representatives applicable to other
bills and resolutions in similar circumstances.
(h) Floor Consideration in the Senate.--
(1) Motion privileged.--A motion in the Senate to proceed
to the consideration of a joint resolution shall be
privileged and not debatable. An amendment to the motion
shall not be in order, nor shall it be in order to move to
reconsider the vote by which the motion is agreed to or
disagreed to.
(2) Debate limited.--Debate in the Senate on a joint
resolution, and all debatable motions and appeals in
connection therewith, shall be limited to not more than 20
hours. The time shall be equally divided between, and
controlled by, the majority leader and the minority leader or
their designees.
(3) Control of debate.--Debate in the Senate on any
debatable motion or appeal in connection with a joint
resolution shall be limited to not more than 1 hour, to be
equally divided between, and controlled by, the mover and the
manager of the joint resolution, except that in the event the
manager of the joint resolution is in favor of any such
motion or appeal, the time in opposition thereto shall be
controlled by the minority leader or his designee. Such
leaders, or either of them, may, from time under their
control on the passage of a joint resolution, allot
additional time to any Senator during the consideration of
any debatable motion or appeal.
(4) Other motions.--A motion in the Senate to further limit
debate is not debatable. A motion to recommit a joint
resolution is not in order.
(i) Rules of House of Representatives and Senate.--
Subsections (c) through (h) are enacted by the Congress--
(1) as an exercise of the rulemaking power of the House of
Representatives and the Senate, respectively, and as such
subsections (c) through (h) are deemed a part of the rules of
each House, respectively, but applicable only with respect to
the procedure to be followed in that House in the case of
joint resolutions described in subsection (c), and
subsections (c) through (h) supersede other rules only to the
extent that they are inconsistent therewith; and
(2) with full recognition of the constitutional right of
either House to change the rules (so far as relating to the
procedure of that House) at any time, in the same manner and
to the same extent as in the case of any other rule of that
House.
TITLE III--EXPANSION OF APPLICABILITY OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES
SEC. 301. APPLICATION OF COUNTERVAILING DUTIES TO NONMARKET
ECONOMIES AND STRENGTHENING APPLICATION OF THE
LAW.
(a) In General.--Section 701(a)(1) of the Tariff Act of
1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671(a)(1)) is amended by inserting
``(including a nonmarket economy country)'' after ``country''
each place it appears.
(b) Definition of Countervailable Subsidy.--Section
771(5)(E) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677(5)(E)) is
amended by adding at the end the following: ``For purposes of
clauses (i) through (iv), if there is a reasonable indication
that government intervention has distorted prices or other
economic indicators in the country that is subject to the
investigation or review, or if data regarding such prices or
economic indicators are otherwise unavailable, then the
administering authority shall measure the benefit conferred
to the recipient by reference to data regarding relevant
prices or other economic indicators from a country other than
the country that is subject to the investigation or review.
If there is a reasonable indication that prices or other
economic indicators within a political subdivision, dependent
territory, or possession of a foreign country are distorted,
or data are not available, then the administering authority
shall measure the benefit conferred to the recipient in that
political subdivision, dependent territory, or possession by
reference to data from the most comparable area or region in
which relevant prices or other economic indicators are not
distorted, regardless of whether such area or region is in
the same country.''.
(c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsections (a)
and (b) apply to petitions filed under section 702 of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671a) on or after the date of
the enactment of this Act.
(d) Antidumping Provisions Not Affected.--The amendments
made by subsections (a) and (b) shall not affect the status
of a country as a nonmarket economy country for the purposes
of any matter relating to antidumping duties under subtitle B
of title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1673 et
seq.).
SEC. 302. TREATMENT OF EXCHANGE-RATE MANIPULATION AS
COUNTERVAILABLE SUBSIDY UNDER TITLE VII OF THE
TARIFF ACT OF 1930.
(a) Amendments to Definition of Countervailable Subsidy.--
Section 771(5)(D) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1677(5)(D)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``The term'' and inserting ``(i) The
term'';
(2) by redesignating clauses (i) through (iv) as subclauses
(I) through (IV), respectively; and
(3) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) The term `provides a financial contribution'
includes engaging in exchange-rate manipulation (as defined
in paragraph (5C)).''.
(b) Definition of Exchange-Rate Manipulation.--Section 771
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1677) is amended by
inserting after paragraph (5B) the following new paragraph:
``(5C) Definition of exchange-rate manipulation.--
``(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraphs (5) and (5A),
the term `exchange-rate manipulation' means protracted large-
scale intervention by a country to undervalue the country's
currency in the exchange market that prevents effective
balance-of-payments adjustment or that gains an unfair
competitive advantage over any other country.
``(B) Factors.--In determining whether exchange-rate
manipulation is occurring and a benefit thereby conferred,
the administering authority in each case--
``(i) shall consider the exporting country's--
``(I) bilateral balance-of-trade surplus or deficit with
the United States;
``(II) balance-of-trade surplus or deficit with its other
trading partners individually and in the aggregate;
``(III) foreign direct investment in its territory;
``(IV) currency-specific and aggregate amounts of foreign
currency reserves; and
``(V) mechanisms employed to maintain its currency at a
fixed exchange rate relative to another currency and,
particularly, the nature, duration, monetary expenditures,
and potential monetary expenditures of those mechanisms;
``(ii) may consider such other economic factors as are
relevant; and
``(iii) shall measure the trade surpluses or deficits
described in subclauses (I) and (II) of clause (i) with
reference to the trade data reported by the United States and
the other trading partners of the exporting country, unless
such trade data are not available or are demonstrably
inaccurate, in which case the exporting country's trade data
may be relied upon if shown to be sufficiently accurate and
trustworthy.
``(C) Type of economy.--A country found to be engaged in
exchange-rate manipulation may have--
``(i) a market economy;
``(ii) a nonmarket economy; or
``(iii) a combination thereof.''.
SEC. 303. AFFIRMATION OF NEGOTIATING OBJECTIVE ON BORDER
TAXES.
The Congress reaffirms the negotiating objective relating
to border taxes set forth in section 2102(b)(15) of the
Bipartisan Trade Promotion Authority Act of 2002 (19 U.S.C.
3802(b)(15)).
SEC. 304. PRESIDENTIAL CERTIFICATION; APPLICATION OF
COUNTERVAILING DUTY LAW.
(a) Certification by the President.--
(1) In general.--The President shall certify to the
Congress by January 1, 2009 that, under the Agreement on
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures or subsequent agreement
of the World Trade Organization, the full or partial
exemption, remission, or deferral specifically related to
exports of direct taxes is treated in the same manner as the
full or partial exemption, remission, or deferral
specifically related to exports of indirect taxes.
(2) Effect of failure to certify.--If the President does
not make the certification to Congress required by paragraph
(1) by January 1, 2009, the Secretary of Commerce, in any
investigation conducted under subtitle A of title VII of the
Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1671 et seq.) to determine
whether a countervailable subsidy is being provided with
respect to a product of a country that provides the full or
partial exemption, remission, or deferral specifically
related to exports of indirect taxes on products exported
from that country, shall treat as a countervailable subsidy
the full or partial exemption, remission, or deferral
specifically related to exports of indirect taxes paid on
that product.
(b) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Agreement on subsidies and countervailing measures.--
The term ``Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing
Measures'' means the agreement referred to in section
101(d)(12) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C.
3511(d)(12)).
(2) Direct taxes.--The term ``direct taxes'' means taxes on
wages, profits, interest, rents, royalties, and all other
forms of income, and taxes on the ownership of real property.
(3) Import charges.--The term ``import charges'' means
tariffs, duties, and other fiscal charges that are levied on
imports.
(4) Indirect taxes.--The term ``indirect taxes'' means
sales, excise, turnover, value added, franchise, stamp,
transfer, inventory, and equipment taxes, border taxes, and
all taxes other than direct taxes and import charges.
[[Page S921]]
(5) Full or partial exemption, remission, or deferral
specifically related to exports of direct taxes.--The term
``full or partial exemption, remission, or deferral
specifically related to exports of direct taxes'' means
direct taxes that are paid to the United States Government by
a business concern and are fully or partially exempted,
remitted, or deferred by the Government by reason of the
export by that business concern of its products from the
United States.
(6) Full or partial exemption, remission, or deferral
specifically related to exports of indirect taxes.--The term
``full or partial exemption, remission, or deferral
specifically related to exports of indirect taxes'' means
indirect taxes that are paid to the government of a country
by a business concern and are fully or partially exempted,
remitted, or deferred by that government by reason of the
export by that business concern of its products from that
country.
(c) Effective Period.--
(1) In general.--Subsection (a) shall cease to be effective
on the date on which the President makes a certification
described in subsection (a).
(2) Termination of countervailing duty orders.--Any
countervailing duty order that is issued pursuant to an
investigation conducted under subsection (a) and is still in
effect on the date described in paragraph (1) shall terminate
on such date.
TITLE IV--LIMITATION ON PRESIDENTIAL DISCRETION IN ADDRESSING MARKET
DISRUPTION
SEC. 401. ACTION TO ADDRESS MARKET DISRUPTION.
Section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2451) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``to the extent and for
such period'' and all that follows to the end period and
inserting ``as recommended by the International Trade
Commission'';
(2) in subsection (e), by striking ``agreed upon by either
group'' and all that follows to the end period and inserting
``shall be considered an affirmative determination'';
(3) in subsection (f)--
(A) by striking ``on Proposed Remedies'' in the heading and
inserting ``for Relief'';
(B) by striking ``the Commission shall propose'' and
inserting ``the Commission shall recommend''; and
(C) by striking ``proposed action'' and inserting
``recommended action'';
(4) by striking subsection (h);
(5) in subsection (i)--
(A) in the flush sentence at the end of paragraph (1), by
striking ``agreed upon by either group'' and all that follows
to the end period and inserting ``shall be deemed an
affirmative determination''; and
(B) by striking paragraphs (3) and (4);
(6) by striking subsections (j) and (k);
(7) by amending paragraph (1) of subsection (l) to read as
follows: ``(1) The President's implementation of the
International Trade Commission remedy shall be published in
the Federal Register.'';
(8) by amending subsection (m) to read as follows:
``(m) Effective Date of Relief.--Import relief under this
section shall take effect on the date the International Trade
Commission's recommendation is published in the Federal
Register, but not later than 15 days after the date of the
Commission's vote recommending the relief.'';
(9) by amending subsection (n) to read as follows:
``(n) Modification of Relief.--Any import relief that
includes an increase in duty or the imposition of import
restrictions shall be for a period not to exceed 3 years.'';
and
(10) by striking subsection (o).
TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS
SEC. 501. APPLICATION TO CANADA AND MEXICO.
Pursuant to article 1902 of the North American Free Trade
Agreement and section 408 of the North American Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 3438), this Act and
the amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to
goods from Canada and Mexico.
______
By Mr. DOMENICI:
S. 366. A bill to authorize the conveyance of certain Federal land in
the State of New Mexico; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry.
Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce an
uncontroversial piece of legislation that I hope will receive prompt
committee action and will make its way quickly to the President's desk
for his signature.
I would first like to familiarize the Senate with the important
mission and related work of the Chihuahuan Desert Nature Park in Las
Cruces, NM. The Chihuahuan Desert is the largest desert in North
America and contains a great variety of unique plant and animal
species. The ecosystem makes up an indispensable part of the
Southwest's treasured ecological diversity. As such, it is important
that we teach our youth an appreciation for New Mexico's biological
diversity and impart upon them the value of this ecological treasure.
The Chihuahuan Desert Nature Park is a non-profit institution that
has spent the past six years providing hands-on science education to K-
12th graders. To achieve this mission, the Nature Park provides
classroom presentations, field trips, schoolyard ecology projects and
teacher workshops. The Nature Park serves more than 11,000 students and
600 teachers annually. This instruction will enable our future leaders
to make informed decisions about how best to manage these valuable
resources. I commend those at the Nature Park for taking the initiative
to create and administer a wonderfully successful program that has been
so beneficial to the surrounding community.
The Chihuahuan Desert Nature Park was granted a 1,000 acre easement
in 1998 at the southern boundary of USDA--Agriculture Research Service
(USDA-ARS) property just north of Las Cruces, NM. This easement will
expire soon. It is important that we provide them a permanent location
so that they are able to continue their valuable mission.
The bill I introduce today would transfer an insignificant amount of
land: 1,000 of 193,000 USDA acres to the Desert Nature Park so that
they may continue their important work. The USDA-ARS has approved the
land transfer, noting the critically important mission of the Desert
Park. In addition, this bill was passed by the Senate in the 109th
Congress without amendments by unanimous consent. I have no doubt that
Senators on both sides of the aisle will recognize the importance of
this land transfer.
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. 366
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 ``Jornada Experimental Range
Transfer Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Board.--The term ``Board'' means the Chihuahuan Desert
Nature Park Board.
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture.
SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE OF LAND TO CHIHUAHUAN DESERT NATURE PARK
BOARD.
(a) Conveyance.--The Secretary may convey to the Board, by
quitclaim deed, for no consideration, all right, title, and
interest of the United States in and to the land described in
subsection (b).
(b) Description of Land.--The parcel of land referred to in
subsection (a) consists of not more than 1000 acres of land
selected by the Secretary--
(1) that is located in the Jornada Experimental Range in
the State of New Mexico; and
(2) that is subject to an easement granted by the
Agricultural Research Service to the Board.
(c) Conditions.--The conveyance of land under subsection
(a) shall be subject to--
(1) the condition that the Board pay--
(A) the cost of any surveys of the land; and
(B) any other costs relating to the conveyance;
(2) any rights-of-way to the land reserved by the
Secretary;
(3) a covenant or restriction in the deed to the land
described in subsection (b) requiring that--
(A) the land may be used only for educational purposes;
(B) if the land is no longer used for the purposes
described in subparagraph (A), the land shall, at the
discretion of the Secretary, revert to the United States; and
(C) if the land is determined by the Secretary to be
environmentally contaminated under subsection (d)(2)(A), the
Board shall remediate the contamination; and
(4) any other terms and conditions that the Secretary
determines to be appropriate.
(d) Reversion.--If the land conveyed under subsection (a)
is no longer used for the purposes described in subsection
(c)(3)(A)--
(1) the land shall, at the discretion of the Secretary,
revert to the United States; and
(2) if the Secretary chooses to have the land revert to the
United States, the Secretary shall--
(A) determine whether the land is environmentally
contaminated, including contamination from hazardous wastes,
hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, petroleum, or
petroleum by-products; and
(B) if the Secretary determines that the land is
environmentally contaminated, the Board or any other person
responsible for the contamination shall remediate the
contamination.
______
By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Baucus, Mrs. Boxer, Ms. Cantwell,
Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Kerry,
Mr. Kohl, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Lieberman, Mr.
Menendez, Ms.
[[Page S922]]
Mikulski, Mr. Obama, Mr. Reed, Mr. Salazar, Mr. Schumer, Mr.
Smith, Ms. Stabenow, and Mr. Reid):
S. 368. A bill to amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets
Act of 1968 to enhance the cops on the beat grant program, and for
other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today, I rise to introduce legislation,
the COPS Improvement Act of 2007, to reauthorize the Department of
Justice's Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS). This
program has achieved what my colleagues and I hoped for back when we
were debating the 1994 Crime Bill. Prior to the final vote, in August
of 1994, I stated that ``I will vote for this bill, because, as much as
anything I have ever voted on in 22 years in the U.S. Senate, I truly
believe that passage of this legislation will make a difference in the
lives of the American people. I believe with every fiber in my being
that if this bill passes, fewer people will be murdered, fewer people
will be victims, fewer women will be senselessly beaten, fewer people
will continue on the drug path, and fewer children will become
criminals.''
Fortunately, with the creation of the COPS program, we were able to
form a partnership amongst Federal, State, and local law enforcement
and create programs that helped drive down crime rates for eight
consecutive years. In 1994 we had historically high rates of violent
crimes, such as murders, forcible rapes, and aggravated assaults. We
were able to reduce these to the lowest levels in a generation. We
reduced the murder rate by 37.8 percent; we reduced forcible rapes by
19.1 percent; and we reduced aggravated assaults by 25.5 percent.
Property crimes, including auto thefts also were reduced from
historical highs to the lowest levels in decades. The COPS program has
been endorsed by every major law enforcement group in the Nation,
including the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP), the
National Association of Police Organizations (NAPO), the National
Sheriffs Association (NSA), the International Brotherhood of Police
Organizations, the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement
Officials (NOBLE), the International Union of Police Associations
(IUPA), the Fraternal Order of Police, and others.
Rather than support this important program, the Bush Administration
and Republican leadership has been set on eliminating it. President
Bush has proposed cuts each year he has been in office, and while we
have fought to maintain funding for COPS, the hiring program was
completely eliminated in 2005. Overall funding for State and local law
enforcement programs has been slashed by billions and the COPS hiring
program has been completely eliminated. Last year's budget request
contained only $117 million for local law enforcement from COPS and the
complete elimination of the Justice Assistance Grant.
These cuts are coming at the worst possible time. Local law
enforcement is facing what I have called a perfect storm. The FBI is
reprogramming its field agents from local crime to terrorism.
Undoubtedly, this is necessary given the threats facing our Nation.
But, this means that there will be less Federal assistance for drug
cases, bank robberies, and violent crime. Local law enforcement will be
required to fill the gap left by the FBI in addition to performing more
and more homeland security duties.
Due to budget restraints at the local level and the unprecedented
cuts in Federal assistance they will be less able to do either.
Articles in the USA Today and the New York Times highlighted the fact
that many cities are being forced to eliminate officers because of
local budgets woes. In fact, New York City has lost over 3,000 officers
in the 1ast few years. Other cities, such as Cleveland, MN, and
Houston, TX, are facing similar shortages. As a result, local police
chiefs are reluctantly pulling officers from the proactive policing
activities that were so successful in the nineties, and they are unable
to provide sufficient numbers of officers for Federal task forces.
These choices are not made lightly. Police chiefs understand the value
of proactive policing and the need to be involved in homeland security
task forces; however, they simply don't have the manpower to do it all.
Responding to emergency calls must take precedence over proactive
programs and task forces, and we are beginning to pay the price. The
FBI is reporting rising violent crime in cities throughout the Nation,
with murder rates rising 3.4 percent in 2005. Additionally, the
preliminary numbers for 2006 show that violent crime is up 3.7 percent
and murder rates up 1.4 percent when compared to last year's
preliminary numbers.
Although the COPS program was re-authorized as part of Department of
Justice Reauthorization, this bill is critical for several reasons.
First, it re-establishes our commitment to the hiring program by
including a separate authorization of $600 million to hire officers to
engage in community policing, intelligence gathering, and as school
resource officers. We need more cops on the beat and in our schools,
and this will help get us there. It also authorizes $350 million per
year for technology grants, and it includes $200 million per year to
help local district attorneys hire community prosecutors. Finally, it
congressionally establishes the COPS office as the entity within the
Department of Justice to carry out these functions in order to
eliminate duplication of efforts. The bottom line is that this bill
keeps faith with our State and local law enforcement officers who put
their lives on the line every day to keep our communities safe from
crime and terrorism. I would ask all of my colleagues to go ask their
local police chief or sheriff and ask them if they should support this
legislation, and I hope that they will because if they did it would be
passed 100-0.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of this legislation 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. 368
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 ``COPS Improvements Act of
2007''.
SEC. 2. COPS GRANT IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) In General.--Section 1701 of the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd) is amended--
(1) by amending subsection (a) to read as follows:
``(a) Grant Authorization.--The Attorney General shall
carry out grant programs under which the Attorney General
makes grants to States, units of local government, Indian
tribal governments, other public and private entities, multi-
jurisdictional or regional consortia, and individuals for the
purposes described in subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e).'';
(2) in subsection (b)--
(A) by striking the subsection heading text and inserting
``Community Policing and Crime Prevention Grants'';
(B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``, to increase the
number of officers deployed in community-oriented policing'';
(C) in paragraph (4), by inserting ``or train'' after ``pay
for'';
(D) by inserting after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) award grants to hire school resource officers and to
establish school-based partnerships between local law
enforcement agencies and local school systems to combat
crime, gangs, drug activities, and other problems in and
around elementary and secondary schools;'';
(E) by striking paragraph (9);
(F) by redesignating paragraphs (10) through (12) as
paragraphs (9) through (11), respectively;
(G) by striking paragraph (13);
(H) by redesignating paragraphs (14) through (17) as
paragraphs (12) through (15), respectively;
(I) in paragraph (14), as so redesignated, by striking
``and'' at the end;
(J) in paragraph (15), as so redesignated, by striking the
period at the end and inserting a semicolon; and
(K) by adding at the end the following:
``(16) establish and implement innovative programs to
reduce and prevent illegal drug manufacturing, distribution,
and use, including the manufacturing, distribution, and use
of methamphetamine; and
``(17) award enhancing community policing and crime
prevention grants that meet emerging law enforcement needs,
as warranted.'';
(3) by striking subsection (c);
(4) by striking subsections (h) and (i);
(5) by redesignating subsections (d) through (g) as
subsections (f) through (i), respectively;
(6) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Troops-to-Cops Programs.--
``(1) In general.--Grants made under subsection (a) may be
used to hire former members of the Armed Forces to serve as
career
[[Page S923]]
law enforcement officers for deployment in community-oriented
policing, particularly in communities that are adversely
affected by a recent military base closing.
``(2) Definition.--In this subsection, `former member of
the Armed Forces' means a member of the Armed Forces of the
United States who is involuntarily separated from the Armed
Forces within the meaning of section 1141 of title 10, United
States Code.
``(d) Community Prosecutors Program.--The Attorney General
may make grants under subsection (a) to pay for additional
community prosecuting programs, including programs that
assign prosecutors to--
``(1) handle cases from specific geographic areas; and
``(2) address counter-terrorism problems, specific violent
crime problems (including intensive illegal gang, gun, and
drug enforcement and quality of life initiatives), and
localized violent and other crime problems based on needs
identified by local law enforcement agencies, community
organizations, and others.
``(e) Technology Grants.--The Attorney General may make
grants under subsection (a) to develop and use new
technologies (including interoperable communications
technologies, modernized criminal record technology, and
forensic technology) to assist State and local law
enforcement agencies in reorienting the emphasis of their
activities from reacting to crime to preventing crime and to
train law enforcement officers to use such technologies.'';
(7) in subsection (f), as so redesignated--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking ``to States, units of
local government, Indian tribal governments, and to other
public and private entities,'';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking ``define for State and
local governments, and other public and private entities,''
and inserting ``establish'';
(C) in the first sentence of paragraph (3), by inserting
``(including regional community policing institutes)'' after
``training centers or facilities''; and
(D) by adding at the end the following:
``(4) Exclusivity.--The Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services shall be the exclusive component of the
Department of Justice to perform the functions and activities
specified in this paragraph.'';
(8) in subsection (g), as so redesignated, by striking
``may utilize any component'', and all that follows and
inserting ``shall use the Office of Community Oriented
Policing Services of the Department of Justice in carrying
out this part.'';
(9) in subsection (h), as so redesignated--
(A) by striking ``subsection (a)'' the first place that
term appears and inserting ``paragraphs (1) and (2) of
subsection (b)''; and
(B) by striking ``in each fiscal year pursuant to
subsection (a)'' and inserting ``in each fiscal year for
purposes described in paragraph (1) and (2) of subsection
(b)'';
(10) in subsection (i), as so redesignated, by striking the
second sentence; and
(11) by adding at the end the following:
``(j) Retention of Additional Officer Positions.--For any
grant under paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (b) for hiring
or rehiring career law enforcement officers, a grant
recipient shall retain each additional law enforcement
officer position created under that grant for not less than
12 months after the end of the period of that grant, unless
the Attorney General waives, wholly or in part, the retention
requirement of a program, project, or activity.''.
(b) Applications.--Section 1702 of the Omnibus Crime
Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-1) is
amended--
(1) in subsection (c)--
(A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by inserting ``,
unless waived by the Attorney General'' after ``under this
part shall'';
(B) by striking paragraph (8); and
(C) by redesignating paragraphs (9) through (11) as
paragraphs (8) through (10), respectively; and
(2) by striking subsection (d).
(c) Renewal of Grants.--Section 1703 of the Omnibus Crime
Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-2) is
amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 1703. RENEWAL OF GRANTS.
``(a) In General.--A grant made under this part may be
renewed, without limitations on the duration of such renewal,
to provide additional funds, if the Attorney General
determines that the funds made available to the recipient
were used in a manner required under an approved application
and if the recipient can demonstrate significant progress in
achieving the objectives of the initial application.
``(b) No Cost Extensions.--Notwithstanding subsection (a),
the Attorney General may extend a grant period, without
limitations as to the duration of such extension, to provide
additional time to complete the objectives of the initial
grant award.''.
(d) Limitation on Use of Funds.--Section 1704 of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
3796dd-3) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a), by striking ``that would, in the
absence of Federal funds received under this part, be made
available from State or local sources'' and inserting ``that
the Attorney General determines would, in the absence of
Federal funds received under this part, be made available for
the purpose of the grant under this part from State or local
sources''; and
(2) by striking subsection (c).
(e) Enforcement Actions.--
(1) In general.--Section 1706 of the Omnibus Crime Control
and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-5) is
amended--
(A) in the section heading, by striking ``REVOCATION OR
SUSPENSION OF FUNDING'' and inserting ``ENFORCEMENT
ACTIONS''; and
(B) by striking ``revoke or suspend'' and all that follows
and inserting ``take any enforcement action available to the
Department of Justice.''.
(2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of
contents of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe
Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3711) is amended by striking
the item relating to section 1706 and inserting the
following:
``Sec. 1706. Enforcement actions.''.
(f) Definitions.--Section 1709(1) of the Omnibus Crime
Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796dd-8(1))
is amended--
(1) by inserting ``who is a sworn law enforcement officer''
after ``permanent basis''; and
(2) by inserting ``, including officers for the Amtrak
Police Department'' before the period at the end.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 1001(11) of
the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42
U.S.C. 3793(11)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``1,047,119,000'' and
inserting ``1,150,000,000''; and
(2) in subparagraph (B)--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``3 percent'' and
inserting ``5 percent''; and
(B) by striking the second sentence and inserting the
following: ``Of the funds available for grants under part Q,
not less than $600,000,000 shall be used for grants for the
purposes specified in section 1701(b), not more than
$200,000,000 shall be used for grants under section 1701(d),
and not more than $350,000,000 shall be used for grants under
section 1701(e).''.
(h) Purposes.--Section 10002 of the Public Safety
Partnership and Community Policing Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C.
3796dd note) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (4), by striking ``development'' and
inserting ``use''; and
(2) in the matter following paragraph (4), by striking
``for a period of 6 years''.
(i) COPS Program Improvements.--
(1) In general.--Section 109(b) of the Omnibus Crime
Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3712h(b)) is
amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (1);
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as paragraphs
(1) and (2), respectively; and
(C) in paragraph (2), as so redesignated, by inserting ``,
except for the program under part Q of this title'' before
the period.
(2) Law enforcement computer systems.--Section 107 of the
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C.
3712f) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(c) Exception.--This section shall not apply to any grant
made under part Q of this title.''.
____________________