[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 41 (Friday, March 9, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2970-S2975]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. HATCH (for himself and Mr. Bennett):
  S. 832. A bill to provide for the sale of approximately 25 acres of 
public land to the Turnabout Ranch, Escalante, Utah, at fair market 
value; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation that would 
correct a property trespass question involving a 25-acre parcel of 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land in Garfield County, UT. The parcel 
is part of the Turnabout Ranch, which hosts a successful and popular 
program to rehabilitate troubled youth.
  The trespass conflict is the result of an erroneous survey in January 
1999, at the time the Congress approved a major land exchange, P.L. 
105-335, between the State of Utah and the BLM and erroneously included 
a part of the Turnabout Ranch. The land is located along the border of 
the Grand Staircase Escalante (GSE) Monument. My bill makes a slight 
boundary change to resolve the trespass question. This would grant the 
owners of the ranch the opportunity to purchase the erroneously 
surveyed land at fair market value so that this very important program 
for at-risk youth can continue unhindered.
  Since 1995, Turn-About Ranch has graduated some 500 troubled and at-
risk teenagers through an intense program of training and 
rehabilitation. The ranch employs about 35 Garfield County residents. 
The Turn-About Ranch program has strong support from the local 
community and the Garfield Country Commission.
  Historically used for agriculture and grazing purposes, the ranch was 
purchased by the Townsend Family who leased the land to Turn-About 
Ranch, Inc., for the exclusive purpose of restoring dignity and self-
esteem to wayward teenagers. Because government-owned land administered 
by the BLM surrounds the private land, the only way to resolve the 
trespass is for the Congress to pass legislation.
  This legislation offers a simple and fair solution to a fairly 
technical problem on our public lands. I hope Congress can use this 
legislation to resolve this problem in the very near future.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. COLEMAN (for himself and Mr. Pryor):
  S. 833. A bill to make the United States competitive in a global 
economy; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Competitiveness 
Through Education, Technology, and Enterprise Act otherwise known as 
the COMPETE Act. The bill I introduce today is similar to legislation I 
have introduced in the 109th Congress. I am very pleased to be joined 
by my very good friend and colleague, Senator Mark Pryor, who shares my 
commitment to keeping the U. S. competitive not just for today but for 
tomorrow as well.
  Earlier this week Microsoft's Bill Gates came before the Health, 
Education, Labor and Pensions Committee to talk about keeping our 
country competitive. He said that ``the U.S. cannot maintain its 
economic leadership unless our workforce consists of people who have 
the knowledge and skills needed to drive innovation.'' Moreover he said 
that ``we simply cannot sustain an economy based on innovation unless 
our citizens are educated in math, science and engineering.''
  My bill is inspired by the same line of thinking. The COMPETE Act is 
based on three simple, fundamental ideas: 1. The U.S. needs to remain a 
leader when it comes to technology and innovation; 2. We must prepare 
our future workforce and ``up-skill'' our current workforce for our 
increasingly global and information technology driven economy; and 3. 
We must better utilize existing private-public partnerships to achieve 
these goals.
  The challenges we face are stark especially when it comes to the 
future competitiveness of our workforce. Today, China graduates four 
times as many engineers as the U.S. while the small nation of South 
Korea graduates just as many as we do. In three short years, Asia will 
be home to more than 90 percent of the world's scientists and 
engineers.
  According to a recent poll, 84 percent of middle school students 
preferred to eat their vegetables than do their math homework. As Tom 
Friedman wrote in his book the World is Flat when he was growing up as 
a kid his mother used to tell him to eat all his vegetables because 
kids in China were starving. Today, his mother would say do your 
homework because the kids in China are starving for our jobs.
  As if this were not enough, we also need to concern ourselves with 
the coming retirement wave of high-skilled workers in the fields of 
engineering, science, technology and math. According to the National 
Science Foundation, about a third of American scientists and engineers 
are over 50 years old.
  To encourage and promote our students to seek out these types of 
careers we need to improve the performance of students in science and 
math. Several reports have indicated that U.S. students do not perform 
at the level of their international counterparts in math and science. 
Our fourth graders compare fairly well internationally, but by high 
school American students slip to 24th place out of 29 developing 
nations in math literacy and problem solving.
  We must make sure that our educational system is up to the task in 
preparing our future workforce. To reward elementary and secondary 
schools for a job well done, COMPETE provides bonus grants to high 
performing elementary and secondary schools that show the greatest 
improvement in their State assessments in math and science. COMPETE 
also increases the alternative percentage limitation for corporate 
charitable contributions to the mathematics and science partnership 
program in order to encourage greater support from the corporate world.

  To help ensure that more students receive a higher education and have 
the skills necessary to compete in today's global economy COMPETE puts 
the Senate on record in support of raising the maximum Pell Grant to 
$5,400.
  In addition to undergraduate education, COMPETE also establishes a 
matching grant program where Federal and private resources will be used 
to help graduate students in science, technology, engineering and 
mathematics meet the cost of getting a graduate degree. This grant 
program will also support outreach and mentoring activities to increase 
the participation of underrepresented groups in these fields at every 
level of education.
  To keep today's workforce competitive and prepare our future 
workforce, COMPETE creates a tax credit to help ``up-skill'' America's 
workers so that

[[Page S2971]]

they can compete in today's increasingly information and technology-
driven global economy. COMPETE also creates a workforce development 
grant pilot program to encourage leading innovative small businesses to 
provide short-term workforce training opportunities for college 
students who major in the fields of science, technology, engineering 
and math. Our employers need more than just raw materials. They need a 
highly skilled workforce that provides extra value to their products 
and services.
  Finally in order to ensure our leadership in innovation, COMPETE 
makes the research and development credit permanent. We must look at 
ways to ensure the ability of American companies to stay at the 
forefront of the technological revolution. Temporarily extending the 
R&D tax credit makes it difficult for our businesses to undertake 
research and development activities necessary for our continued long-
term competitiveness in the global economy.
  Earlier this week, bipartisan comprehensive competitiveness 
legislation known as the America Competes Act was introduced. I am a 
proud original cosponsor of this bill which seeks to respond to the 
recommendations made by the National Academies' ``Rising Above the 
Gathering Storm'' report and the Council on Competitiveness'' 
``Innovate America'' report.
  In an effort to contribute to this important discussion I am 
introducing COMPETE, which complements the America Competes Act through 
its emphasis on innovation and workforce development and public-private 
education partnership in the areas of science, technology, engineering 
and math.
  We must realize the fact that our competitiveness relative to the 
global economy is in real danger. This situation is smoldering--it's 
not a five-alarm fire yet--I just hope we don't act too late. If you 
throw a frog into boiling water, it jumps out. If you throw a frog into 
warm water, it will sit there comfortably until its internal organs 
overheat and it dies. Let's not let ourselves wake up in a few years to 
see that our global competitiveness has slipped away.
  I am committed to working on this issue now. While the challenges to 
our leadership in the global economy are indeed significant, I am 
confident and optimistic that we will successfully address challenges 
to our leadership in the global economy.
  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. 833

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       (a) In General.--This Act may be cited as the 
     ``Competitiveness through Education, Technology, and 
     Enterprise Act of 2007'' or the ``COMPETE Act of 2007''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title.

              TITLE I--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES

Sec. 101. Permanent extension of research credit.

               TITLE II--WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES

Sec. 201. Credit for information and communications technology 
              education and training program expenses.
Sec. 202. Eligible educational institution.
Sec. 203. SBIR-STEM Workforce Development Grant Pilot Program.

                TITLE III--PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP PROVISIONS

Sec. 301. Alternative percentage limitation for corporate charitable 
              contributions to the mathematics and science partnership 
              program.

                     TITLE IV--EDUCATION PROVISIONS

Sec. 401. Federal Pell Grants.
Sec. 402. Matching funds program to promote American competitiveness 
              through graduate education.
Sec. 403. Mathematics and science partnership bonus grants.

              TITLE I--RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES

     SEC. 101. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF RESEARCH CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Section 41 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 is amended by striking subsection (h).
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (1) of section 45C(b) 
     of such Code is amended by striking subparagraph (D).
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to amounts paid or incurred after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

               TITLE II--WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES

     SEC. 201. CREDIT FOR INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS 
                   TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM 
                   EXPENSES.

       (a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 30D. INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY 
                   EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM EXPENSES.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--
       ``(1) In general.--There shall be allowed as a credit 
     against the tax imposed by this chapter for the taxable year 
     an amount equal to 50 percent of information and 
     communications technology education and training program 
     expenses paid or incurred by the taxpayer for the benefit 
     of--
       ``(A) in the case of a taxpayer engaged in a trade or 
     business, an employee of the taxpayer, or
       ``(B) in the case of a taxpayer who is an individual not so 
     engaged, such individual.
       ``(2) Coordination of credits.--Credit shall be allowable 
     to the employer with respect to an employee only to the 
     extent that the employee assigns some or all of the 
     limitation applicable to such employee under subsection (b) 
     to such employer.
       ``(b) Limitations.--
       ``(1) In general.--The amount of expenses with respect to 
     any individual which may be taken into account under 
     subsection (a) for the taxable year shall not exceed $4,000.
       ``(2) Increase in credit amount for participation in 
     certain programs and for certain individuals.--Paragraph (1) 
     shall be applied by substituting `$5,000' for `$4,000' in the 
     case of expenses--
       ``(A) with respect to a program operated--
       ``(i) by an employer who has 200 or fewer employees for 
     each business day in each of 20 or more calendar weeks in the 
     current or preceding calendar year,
       ``(ii) in an empowerment zone or enterprise community 
     designated under part I of subchapter U or a renewal 
     community designated under part I of subchapter X,
       ``(iii) in a school district in which at least 50 percent 
     of the students attending schools in such district are 
     eligible for free or reduced-cost lunches under the school 
     lunch program established under the Richard B. Russell 
     National School Lunch Act,
       ``(iv) in an area designated as a disaster area by the 
     Secretary of Agriculture under section 321 of the 
     Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act or by the 
     President under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
     Emergency Assistance Act in the taxable year or the 4 
     preceding taxable years,
       ``(v) in a rural enterprise community designated under 
     section 766 of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and 
     Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 
     1999 (112 Stat. 2681-37),
       ``(vi) in an area designated by the Secretary of 
     Agriculture as a Rural Economic Area Partnership Zone, or
       ``(vii) in an area over which an Indian tribal government 
     (as defined in section 7701(a)(40)) has jurisdiction, or
       ``(B) in the case of an individual with a disability.
       ``(c) Information Technology Education and Training Program 
     Expenses.--For purposes of this section--
       ``(1) In general.--The term `information technology 
     education and training program expenses' means expenses paid 
     or incurred by reason of the participation of the taxpayer 
     (or any employee of the taxpayer) in any information and 
     communications technology education and training program. 
     Such expenses shall include expenses paid in connection 
     with--
       ``(A) course work,
       ``(B) certification testing,
       ``(C) programs carried out under the Act of August 16, 1937 
     (50 Stat. 664, chapter 663; 29 U.S.C. 50 et seq.) which are 
     registered by the Department of Labor, and
       ``(D) other expenses that are essential to assessing skill 
     acquisition.
       ``(2) Information technology education and training 
     program.--The term `information technology education and 
     training program' means a training program in information and 
     communications technology workplace disciplines or other 
     skill sets which is provided in the United States by an 
     accredited college, university, private career school, 
     postsecondary educational institution, a commercial 
     information technology provider, or an employer-owned 
     information technology training organization.
       ``(3) Commercial information technology training 
     provider.--The term `commercial information technology 
     training provider' means a private sector organization 
     providing an information and communications technology 
     education and training program.
       ``(4) Employer-owned information technology training 
     organization.--The term `employer-owned information 
     technology training organization' means a private sector 
     organization that provides information technology training to 
     its employees using internal training development and 
     delivery personnel. The training programs must use industry-
     recognized training disciplines and evaluation methods, 
     comparable to institutional and commercial training 
     providers.
       ``(d) Denial of Double Benefit.--

[[Page S2972]]

       ``(1) Disallowance of other credits and deductions.--No 
     deduction or credit shall be allowed under any other 
     provision of this chapter for expenses taken into account in 
     determining the credit under this section.
       ``(2) Reduction for hope and lifetime learning credits.--
     The amount taken into account under subsection (a) shall be 
     reduced by the information technology education and training 
     program expenses taken into account in determining the 
     credits under section 25A.
       ``(e) Certain Rules Made Applicable.--For purposes of this 
     section, rules similar to the rules of section 45A(e)(2) and 
     subsections (c), (d), and (e) of section 52 shall apply.
       ``(f) Application With Other Credits.--The credit allowed 
     by subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not exceed the 
     excess (if any) of--
       ``(1) the regular tax for the taxable year reduced by the 
     sum of the credits allowable under the subpart A and the 
     previous sections of this subpart, over
       ``(2) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable year.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     B of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

``Sec. 30D. Information and communications technology education and 
              training program expenses.''.

       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to amounts paid or incurred in taxable years 
     beginning after December 31, 2006.

     SEC. 202. ELIGIBLE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.

       (a) In General.--Section 25A(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (relating to eligible educational institution) 
     is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) Eligible educational institution.--The term `eligible 
     educational institution' means--
       ``(A) an institution--
       ``(i) which is described in section 101(b) or 102(a) of the 
     Higher Education Act of 1965, and
       ``(ii) which is eligible to participate in a program under 
     title IV of such Act, or
       ``(B) a commercial information and communications 
     technology training provider (as defined in section 
     30D(c)(3)).''.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--The second sentence of section 
     221(d)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by 
     striking ``section 25A(f)(2)'' and inserting ``section 
     25A(f)(2)(A)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2006.

     SEC. 203. SBIR-STEM WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT GRANT PILOT 
                   PROGRAM.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section--
       (1) the term ``Administrator'' means the Administrator of 
     the Small Business Administration;
       (2) the term ``eligible entity'' means a grantee under the 
     SBIR Program that provides an internship program for STEM 
     college students;
       (3) the terms ``Phase I'' and ``Phase II'' mean Phase I and 
     Phase II grants under the SBIR Program, respectively;
       (4) the term ``pilot program'' means the SBIR-STEM 
     Workforce Development Grant Pilot Program established under 
     subsection (b);
       (5) the term ``SBIR Program'' has the meaning given that 
     term in section 9(e) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 
     638(e)); and
       (6) the term ``STEM college student'' means a college 
     student in the field of science, technology, engineering, or 
     math.
       (b) Pilot Program Established.--From amounts made available 
     to carry out this section, the Administrator shall establish 
     an SBIR-STEM Workforce Development Grant Pilot Program to 
     encourage the business community to provide workforce 
     development opportunities to STEM college students, by 
     providing an SBIR bonus grant to eligible entities.
       (c) Awards.--A bonus grant to an eligible entity under the 
     pilot program shall be in an amount equal to 10 percent of 
     either a Phase I or Phase II grant, as applicable, with a 
     total award maximum of not more than $10,000 per year.
       (d)  Evaluation.--Following the fifth year of funding under 
     this section, the Administrator shall submit a report to 
     Congress on the results of the pilot program.
       (e) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section--
       (1) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2007;
       (2) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
       (3) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
       (4) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2010; and
       (5) $1,000,000 for fiscal year 2011.

                TITLE III--PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP PROVISIONS

     SEC. 301. ALTERNATIVE PERCENTAGE LIMITATION FOR CORPORATE 
                   CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MATHEMATICS AND 
                   SCIENCE PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 170(b) of the Internal Revenue 
     Code of 1986 (related to percentage limitations) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Special rule for corporate contributions to the 
     mathematics and science partnership program.--
       ``(A) In general.--In the case of a corporation which makes 
     an eligible mathematics and science contribution--
       ``(i) the limitation under paragraph (2) shall apply 
     separately with respect to all such contributions and all 
     other charitable contributions, and
       ``(ii) paragraph (2) shall be applied with respect to all 
     eligible mathematics and science contributions by 
     substituting `15 percent' for `10 percent'.
       ``(B) Eligible mathematics and science contribution.--
       ``(i) In general.--For purposes of this paragraph, the term 
     `eligible mathematics and science contribution' means a 
     charitable contribution (other than a contribution of used 
     equipment) to a qualified partnership for the purpose of an 
     activity described in section 2202(c) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965.
       ``(ii) Qualified partnership.--The term `qualified 
     partnership' means an eligible partnership (within the 
     meaning of section 2201(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965), but only to the extent that such 
     partnership does not include a person other than a person 
     described in paragraph (1)(A).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to contributions made after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

                     TITLE IV--EDUCATION PROVISIONS

     SEC. 401. FEDERAL PELL GRANTS.

       It is the sense of the Senate that the maximum Federal Pell 
     Grant should be increased to--
       (1) $4,600 for academic year 2008-2009;
       (2) $4,800 for academic year 2009-2010;
       (3) $5,000 for academic year 2010-2011;
       (4) $5,200 for academic year 2011-2012; and
       (5) $5,400 for academic year 2012-2013.

     SEC. 402. MATCHING FUNDS PROGRAM TO PROMOTE AMERICAN 
                   COMPETITIVENESS THROUGH GRADUATE EDUCATION.

       (a) Purpose.--The purpose of this section is to promote 
     American economic competitiveness and job creation by--
       (1) assisting graduate students studying the sciences, 
     technology, engineering, and mathematics;
       (2) advancing education in the sciences, technology, 
     engineering, and mathematics;
       (3) stimulating greater links between private industry and 
     graduate education; and
       (4) enabling the Office of Science of the Department of 
     Energy to establish a matching funds program for eligible 
     institutions of higher education.
       (b) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Eligible institution of higher education.--The term 
     ``eligible institution of higher education'' means an 
     institution of higher education, as defined in section 101(a) 
     of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001), that 
     offers an established program of post-baccalaureate study 
     leading to a graduate degree in the sciences, technology, 
     engineering, or mathematics.
       (2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Energy.
       (c) Grants.--
       (1) Grants authorized.--The Secretary, acting through the 
     Undersecretary for Energy, Science, and Environment, is 
     authorized to award grants, on a competitive basis, to 
     eligible institutions of higher education to enable the 
     eligible institutions of higher education to carry out the 
     authorized activities described in subsection (e).
       (2) Matching funds required.--In order to receive a grant 
     under this subsection, an eligible institution of higher 
     education shall agree to provide matching funds, toward the 
     cost of the authorized activities to be assisted under the 
     grant, in an amount equal to 25 percent of the funds received 
     under the grant.
       (3) Award considerations.--In awarding grants under this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall take into consideration--
       (A) the demonstrated commitment of the eligible institution 
     of higher education to providing matching funds (including 
     tuition remission, tuition waivers, and other types of 
     institutional support) toward the cost of the authorized 
     activities to be assisted under the grant;
       (B) the demonstrated capacity of the eligible institution 
     of higher education to raise matching funds from private 
     sources;
       (C) the demonstrated ability of the eligible institution of 
     higher education to work with private corporations and 
     organizations to promote economic competitiveness and job 
     creation;
       (D) the demonstrated ability of the eligible institution of 
     higher education to increase the number of graduates of the 
     eligible institution of higher education's graduate programs 
     in the sciences, technology, engineering, or mathematics with 
     the interdisciplinary background and the technical, 
     professional, and personal skills needed to contribute to 
     American competitiveness and job creation in the future;
       (E) the potential for the grant assistance to increase the 
     number of graduates of the eligible institution of higher 
     education's graduate programs in the sciences, technology, 
     engineering, or mathematics; and
       (F) the demonstrated track record of the eligible 
     institution of higher education in outreach and mentoring 
     activities that have the expressed purpose of recruiting and 
     retaining women, recognized minorities, and individuals with 
     disabilities in the sciences, technology, engineering, or 
     mathematics.
       (4) Amount.--The Secretary shall award each grant under 
     this subsection in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 
     for each fiscal year.
       (5) Equitable distribution.--In awarding grants under this 
     subsection, the Secretary shall ensure--

[[Page S2973]]

       (A) an equitable geographic distribution of the grants; and
       (B) an equitable distribution of the grants among public 
     and private eligible institutions of higher education.
       (d) Applications.--Each eligible institution of higher 
     education desiring a grant under this section shall submit an 
     application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, 
     and accompanied by such information and assurances as the 
     Secretary may require. Each such application shall describe--
       (1) the authorized activities under subsection (e) for 
     which assistance is sought;
       (2) the source and amount of the matching funds to be 
     provided; and
       (3) the amount of funds raised by the eligible institution 
     of higher education from private sources that will be 
     allocated and spent to carry out the authorized activities 
     described in subsection (e).
       (e) Authorized Activities; Agreement.--Each eligible 
     institution of higher education desiring a grant under this 
     section shall enter into a written agreement with the 
     Secretary under which the eligible institution of higher 
     education agrees to use all of the grant funds--
       (1) to provide stipends or other financial assistance (such 
     as tuition assistance and related expenses) for students who 
     are enrolled in graduate programs in the sciences, 
     technology, engineering, or mathematics at the eligible 
     institution of higher education, as described in the 
     application submitted under subsection (d); and
       (2) to support outreach and mentoring activities to 
     increase the participation of underrepresented groups in the 
     sciences, technology, engineering, or mathematics at all 
     levels or any level of education, including elementary, 
     secondary, and post-secondary education, as described in the 
     application submitted under subsection (d).
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section--
       (1) $50,000,000 for fiscal year 2008;
       (2) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2009;
       (3) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2010;
       (4) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2011; and
       (5) $90,000,000 for fiscal year 2012.

     SEC. 403. MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE PARTNERSHIP BONUS GRANTS.

       Part B of title II of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6661 et seq.) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 2204. MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE PARTNERSHIP BONUS 
                   GRANTS.

       ``(a) In General.--From amounts appropriated under 
     subsection (d), the Secretary shall award a grant--
       ``(1) for each of the school years 2007-2008 through 2016-
     2017, to each of the 5 elementary schools and each of the 5 
     secondary schools in each State, whose students demonstrate 
     the most improvement in mathematics, as measured by the 
     improvement in the students' average score on the State's 
     assessments in mathematics for the school year for which the 
     grant is awarded, as compared to the school year preceding 
     the school year for which the grant is awarded; and
       ``(2) for each of the school years 2011-2012 through 2016-
     2017, to each of the 5 elementary schools and each of the 5 
     secondary schools in each State, whose students demonstrate 
     the most improvement in science, as measured by the 
     improvement in the students' average score on the State's 
     assessments in science for the school year for which the 
     grant is awarded, as compared to the school year preceding 
     the school year for which the grant is awarded.
       ``(b) Grant Amount.--The amount of each grant awarded under 
     this section shall be $500,000.
       ``(c) Applicability.--Sections 2201, 2202, and 2203 shall 
     not apply to this section.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section 
     $130,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2008 through 2011, 
     and $260,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2012 through 
     2017.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. HATCH:
  S. 834. A bill to require annual testimony before Congress by the 
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial Accounting Standards 
Board, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, relating to 
efforts to promote transparency in financial reporting; to the 
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that would 
take a small but significant step toward identifying and repairing some 
of the regulatory problems currently found in our country's financial 
markets.
  In 2002, our financial markets were in serious trouble. In the wake 
of Enron and other prominent accounting scandals, the public's 
confidence in the markets was low. Investors expressed their lack of 
confidence by taking their money out of the stock market, and the 
market indices plummeted. In response to this crisis--and that is 
exactly what it was, a crisis--Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 
of 2002.
  The law did what it was designed to do--re-establish faith in our 
financial markets--but it came at a cost. Complying with several of the 
bill's provisions has increased significantly the costs of doing 
business as a public corporation. Many large corporations continue to 
spend millions of dollars every year in order to comply with the 
Sarbanes-Oxley law. This, they can afford. However, many smaller firms 
have found the costs of compliance with the Act to be crushing, 
burdensome, and negatively affecting their ability to compete in a 
global marketplace.
  The result of this problem is twofold. First, a good number of 
smaller, publicly traded firms have been taken private by investors, 
with others expected to meet this same fate. Second, we have seen fewer 
companies going public, at least in the United States. During the year 
2000, 50 percent of all new Initial Public Offerings, IPOs, were done 
in the United States. By 2006 that number had fallen below 10 percent. 
In 2006, Hong Kong supplanted New York as the number one market for 
stock offerings world-wide.
  A number of my colleagues have pointed out that the dearth of IPOs 
threatens our standing as the premier financial market in the world. In 
the short term, we worry about this costing us prestige and jobs, but 
the real costs are much, much greater. Businesses that want to keep 
growing eventually need to become publicly-traded corporations in order 
to raise sufficient capital. With the costs of crossing that threshold 
greatly higher than they were a few years ago, many companies either 
delay or forego becoming a publicly traded corporation. Companies that 
become or remain privately-held firms eventually run into capital 
constraints of some sort that limit their growth.
  The resulting cost to our economy is a financial market where it is 
more difficult for corporations to raise sufficient capital to expand 
capacity or increase productivity, ultimately resulting in slower 
economic growth. Given the truly awesome problems we face in the 
upcoming years with regard to our unfunded entitlement obligations, we 
are going to need every bit of economic growth we can muster to satisfy 
them. Even those who are ambivalent about the benefits of economic 
growth on the standard of living of all Americans should appreciate its 
importance in meeting our future obligations.
  The bill I am introducing today would help us to identify and, I 
hope, ultimately address, many of the regulatory problems facing our 
financial markets. Specifically, it requires the Chairman of the 
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Chairman of the Financial 
Accounting Standards Board, and the Chairman of the Public Company 
Accounting Oversight Board to annually testify to the relevant Senate 
and House committees on their efforts to reduce complexity in financial 
reporting and to provide more accurate and clear financial information 
to investors. I expect that this requirement would result in more 
awareness of these problems by policymakers in the Legislative and 
Executive Branches, as well as in the private sector, along with 
suggested solutions to these challenges.
  While this bill would be a relatively small step, I believe it can 
help us understand exactly what must be done to address what ails our 
financial markets and help us achieve a consensus on how to fix these 
problems.
  Mr. President, a nearly identical bill was passed by the House of 
Representatives recently with no opposition. I urge the leadership of 
the Senate on both sides of the aisle, along with the members of the 
Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs to support this bill, 
and join the House in making this important step toward increasing the 
efficiency of our financial markets.
  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. 834

       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 ``Promoting Transparency in 
     Financial Reporting Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

       Congress finds the following:
       (1) Transparent and clear financial reporting is integral 
     to the continued growth and

[[Page S2974]]

     strength of our capital markets and the confidence of 
     investors.
       (2) The increasing detail and volume of accounting, 
     auditing, and reporting guidance pose a major challenge.
       (3) The complexity of accounting and auditing standards in 
     the United States has added to the costs and effort involved 
     in financial reporting.

     SEC. 3. ANNUAL TESTIMONY ON REDUCING COMPLEXITY IN FINANCIAL 
                   REPORTING.

       The Securities and Exchange Commission, the Financial 
     Accounting Standards Board, and the Public Company Accounting 
     Oversight Board shall annually provide oral testimony by 
     their respective chairpersons, or a designee thereof, 
     beginning in 2007, and for 5 years thereafter, to the 
     Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the House 
     of Representatives on their efforts to reduce the complexity 
     in financial reporting, so that investors are provided with 
     more accurate and clear financial information. That testimony 
     shall address--
       (1) complex and outdated accounting standards;
       (2) improving the understandability, consistency, and 
     overall usability of the existing accounting and auditing 
     literature;
       (3) developing principles-based accounting standards;
       (4) encouraging the use and acceptance of interactive data; 
     and
       (5) promoting disclosures in ``plain English''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALEXANDER (for himself and Mr. Corker):
  S. 835. A bill to redesignate the Federal building located at 167 
North Main Street in Memphis, Tennessee, as the ``Clifford Davis and 
Odell Horton Federal Building''; to the Committee on Environment and 
Public Works.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce a bill to 
rename the Federal building in Memphis as the Clifford Davis and Odell 
Horton Federal Building. My colleague Senator Corker is a cosponsor. It 
is the same legislation that was introduced in the House of 
Representatives by our new Representative Steve Cohen, and it is 
cosponsored by the rest of the House delegation, both Republicans and 
Democrats.
  Representative Cohen's bill, H.R. 753, was approved by the House 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on March 1 and awaits 
further action by the full House.
  Judge Horton has a remarkable legacy. He was the first African-
American federal district court judge appointed in Tennessee since 
Reconstruction. He was recommended by former Senator Jim Sasser and 
appointed by President Carter on May 12, 1980.
  I remember those days of transition very well. It was in that same 
year that I was Governor of Tennessee. I appointed the first African-
American supreme court justice in Tennessee, Judge George Brown, who 
served with distinction.
  At that time, there had not been an African-American chancellor, 
which is one of our lower court's State judges. I appointed Irwin 
Kilcrease to that position, and he served with a distinguished record 
and retired only within the last couple of years.
  Judge Horton was a real pioneer who came at a time of transition in 
Memphis, where he lived, and in our State's history. He served as chief 
judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee 
from January 1, 1987, until December 31, 1993.
  Odell Horton was born in Bolivar, TN, just outside of Memphis, on May 
13, 1929. He said he grew up in a ``typically rural Southern and 
typically segregated [environment], with all of the attendant 
consequences of that''.
  At about the same time, growing up maybe 40 miles away was a young 
man named Alex Haley who would sit on the front porch of his 
grandparents' home and listen to his great-aunt tell stories of Kunta 
Kinte, which ultimately became the story of ``Roots.''
  Odell Horton's father was a laborer. His mother took in laundry. His 
first job at the age of 6 was delivering laundry for his mom. He and 
his three siblings also picked cotton, stacked lumber, and took other 
odd jobs.
  After high school, he enlisted in the Marine Corps. He enrolled in 
Morehouse College using the GI bill. He served with the Marines during 
the Korean war. He graduated from the U.S. Navy School of Journalism.
  After the Marines, he earned a law degree from Howard University, and 
after graduating from Howard Law School in 1956, he moved to Memphis 
and rented a one-room office on Beale Street--the music street of 
Memphis--and opened his own law practice.
  He did that for 5 years. He served as an assistant U.S. attorney 
after that.
  In 1968, he was director of the city's hospitals, making him the only 
Black division director at city hall at that time.
  He served as judge on the Shelby County Criminal Court. He was a 
commentator on a local television station. He ran for district attorney 
general in 1974, narrowly losing the primary, at that time considered a 
very strong showing by an African-American candidate in a county that 
today has an African-American mayor of Memphis and an African-American 
mayor of Shelby County.
  He was a U.S. Bankruptcy Court judge before being appointed as a U.S. 
district judge by President Carter.
  He was married to his wife Evie for 50 years, with two sons, Odell, 
Jr., and Christopher. He died on February 22, 2006.
  I commend Representative Cohen for his bill to rename the Clifford 
Davis Federal Building to the Clifford Davis and Odell Horton Federal 
Building. Representative Davis was a Congressman who served in the 
House of Representatives from 1940 to 1965. He was one of those five 
Congressmen in the U.S. Capitol when four Puerto Rican nationalists 
opened fire from the visitors' balcony in the Chamber. He was shot in 
the leg at the time.
  Keeping both names on the Federal building is symbolic of the 
transition that took place in Memphis and across the South during 
Odell's lifetime and my lifetime and reminds us that our country is 
committed to equal opportunity, but it has been and is and will be for 
a long time a work in progress.
  Odell Horton is one of the finest examples of that work in progress. 
Having his name on a Federal building will remind all of us of that.
  Mr. CORKER. Mr. President, today I am pleased to cosponsor a bill to 
rename the Memphis Federal Building in order to commemorate a great 
Tennessean, the Honorable Odell Horton.
  Judge Horton, born in Bolivar, TN, on May 13, 1929, was the son of a 
laborer and a laundress. After high school he performed two tours as a 
U.S. marine, including service in the Korean war. He was a graduate of 
Morehouse College, the United States Navy School of Journalism, and 
Howard University School of Law.
  Horton's distinguished legal career began in 1956 in a one room 
office at 145 Beale Street, where he remained in private practice for 6 
years. In 1962 he began service as an assistant U.S. attorney in 
Memphis. He remained in this position until he was appointed to the 
Shelby County Criminal Court, where he was later elected without 
opposition. Judge Horton also served in the capacity as the city of 
Memphis' director of Hospital and Health Services, where he ordered the 
desegregation of the Bowld Hospital in 1968. In 1970, Judge Horton left 
public service to serve as the President of LeMoyne-Owen College, a 
historically African-American liberal arts college.
  In 1976, he began service as a U.S. bankruptcy judge until 1980 when 
he became the first African-American since Reconstruction to be 
appointed to a Tennessee Federal judicial appointment. He was a well 
regarded and respected judge who served as the chief judge for the 
Western District from 1987 through 1993. On May 16, 1995, Judge Horton 
took senior status and 2 years later closed his office.
  He and his wife Evie were married for over 50 years and had two sons, 
Odell, Jr. and Christopher. Unfortunately, Judge Horton left us on 
February 22, 2006. His colleagues remember him as a thorough, patient 
judge who brought a pleasant demeanor to the bench. Judge Horton was a 
man who admirably served his country and State. He was a great 
Tennessean and it is my honor today to cosponsor a bill to memorialize 
his contribution to our country and the State of Tennessee.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. CLINTON:
  S. 837. A bill to develop a generation of school leaders who are 
committed to, and effective in, increasing student achievement and to 
ensure that all low-income, under-performing schools are led by 
effective school leaders who are well-prepared to foster student 
success; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. CLINTON. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
help

[[Page S2975]]

ensure that State and local educational agencies implement an effective 
certification process for school leaders. My legislation will address 
the need to effectively train and retain school leaders to prepare our 
children to compete in the global economy.
  The Fordham Foundation conducted a study on the effectiveness of 
current state licensing procedures and noted that they have ``little 
relevance to the task at hand [and] discourage the leaders we need from 
entering our public schools.'' As a result, school leaders, 
particularly those in under-performing schools, are often unprepared to 
foster student success. That is why I am sponsoring the Improving the 
Leadership and Effectiveness of Administrators for Districts (I LEAD) 
Act.
  As the number of openings for school leaders is expected to increase 
by 20 percent in the next five years, districts will find it 
increasingly difficult to recruit and retain effective principals. We 
need to ensure outgoing school leaders are replaced with effective, 
well-trained school leaders who are prepared to raise student 
achievement.
  The I LEAD Act would allow State and local educational agencies to 
evaluate the effectiveness of their current school leadership licensure 
requirements by examining the impact on student achievement, graduation 
rates, parental involvement, and safety within their schools. It also 
provides grants to implement a plan to recruit and effectively train 
school leaders by providing on-the-job experience during the licensure 
process, financial incentives, ongoing professional development, and 
mentors during their first two years on the job.
  Under this bill, the Department of Education would conduct a study on 
the effectiveness of these grants on student achievement. Upon 
successful implementation of new procedures, state education agencies 
may apply for additional grant money through the Department for 
assistance in replicating the success of this ``model leadership zone'' 
throughout the state. Grants would also be used to reform the state 
certification process.
  School leaders have a significant impact on student achievement. An 
effective and capable school leader can make the difference in 
providing the tools and instructional support staff needed to foster 
the type of school environment conducive to student academic success. 
This legislation would ensure that our principals are given the 
training and support they need to foster student success.
  The I LEAD Act addresses the need to effectively train and retain 
school leaders to prepare our children to compete in the global 
economy. I am hopeful that my Senate colleagues from both sides of the 
aisle will join me today to move this legislation to the floor without 
delay.

                          ____________________