[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 28, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4050-S4061]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Hagel, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Pryor, and
Mr. Tester):
S. 1005. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to improve programs
for veterans, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small
business and entrepreneurship.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleague Senator
Hagel, the Senator from Nebraska, to introduce the Military Reservist
and Veteran Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2007. There are
currently 25 million veterans in America, including over one million
who have left military service since September 11, 2001. As the
conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan continue, the number of veterans,
including service disabled veterans, will increase and reservists will
continue to carry more of the burden than ever before. As veterans and
reservists reenter civilian life, the economic benefits and
opportunities provided by the Federal Government will become even more
critical, particularly in the field of entrepreneurship and business
ownership. As the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Business
and Entrepreneurship, I am serious about addressing the problems
affecting veterans and reservists who wish or are already engaged in
small business and this bill is another step forward in doing so.
As veterans, Senator Hagel and I believe that the government has an
obligation to help deployed reservists avoid economic hardship because
of their service and to help veterans, particularly the service-
disabled, return to civilian life when they retire. There are more
veterans returning each day because of the war on terror--800,000
veterans were discharged between 2002 and 2005--and ensuring that these
individuals have a secure financial future is not just a matter of
fairness but of national security. The treatment of our troops affects
the Nation's ability to recruit and retain the best and brightest.
Veterans have told me that they feel that they are being forgotten and
that the government is simply not living up to its past promises of
helping veteran entrepreneurs succeed. This bill is one step in
ensuring that the government is doing all it can to help those who have
served and sacrificed on our behalf.
The Military Reservist and Veteran Small Business Reauthorization Act
of 2007 reauthorizes the veteran programs in the Small Business
Administration. Specifically, this legislation increases the funding
authorization for the Office of Veteran Business Development from $2
million today to $2.5 million in three years. In light of the large
numbers of veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan and increased
responsibilities placed on this office by Executive Order 13360, it is
high time that the Office of Veteran Business Development receive the
funding levels that it needs.
In addition, this bill permanently extends the SBA Advisory Committee
on Veterans Business Affairs. The committee was created to serve as an
independent source of advice and policy recommendations to the SBA, the
Congress, and the President. The veteran small business owners who
serve on this committee provide a unique perspective which is sorely
needed at this challenging time. Unfortunately, continuing uncertainty
about the Committee's future has, at times, distracted the committee
from focusing on its core function. Therefore, I have called for its
permanent extension. It is clear to me that more needs to be done to
address the issues facing veterans and reservists, and the role this
committee plays will continue to be important.
Additionally, I have taken a number of steps to better serve the
reservists who are serving their country abroad while their businesses
are suffering at home. Over the past decade, the Department of Defense
has increased its reliance on the National Guard and reserves. This has
intensified since September 11 and increased deployments are expected
to continue. The effect of this increase on reservists and small
businesses continues to remain of concern. A 2003 GAO report indicated
that 41 percent of reservists lost income when mobilized. This had a
higher effect on self-employed reservists, 55 percent of whom lost
income.
In 1999, I created the Military Reservist Economic Injury Disaster
Loan (MREIDL) program to provide loans to small businesses that incur
economic injury as a result of an essential employee being called to
active duty. However, since 2002, fewer than 300 of these loans have
been approved by the SBA, despite record numbers of reservists being
called to active duty. It is clear that changes need to be made, so
that reservists are informed about the availability of the MREIDL
program and that the program better meets their needs.
At a hearing of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship
on January 31st, the first hearing we held in this Congress, we heard
suggestions for a number of changes which would improve the Military
Reservist Economic Injury Disaster Loan program, and I have included
those changes in this bill. They include increasing the application
deadline for such a loan from 90 days to one year following the date of
discharge; creating a pre-deployment loan approval process; and
improved outreach and technical assistance.
This bill also creates a non-collaterized loan program. Reservist
families have already sacrificed enough when a family member goes away
to serve their country and when their business is harmed as a result.
This loan program would allow reservist dependent businesses to access
the capital they need to stay afloat without having to sacrifice beyond
the service of the key employees. In order to give reservists time to
repay the loans, the non-collaterized loan created in this bill would
not accumulate interest or require payments for one year or until after
the deployment ends, whichever is longer.
In addition, because loans aren't the answer for every business--
additional debt could permanently cripple some businesses--I have also
included a grant program for reservists. This program would allow up to
$25,000 in grants for small businesses that can show economic injury
because of deployment and prove that they have a viable business plan
for the next three years. A grant program would help small businesses
that cannot afford to take on a military reservist economic injury
disaster loan or that were denied such a loan, but still are viable
businesses and need assistance.
While addressing the funding needs of reservists is essential, I also
want to make sure that reservists receive the technical and management
assistance they need to succeed. For that reason, this bill also
includes the establishment of the Reservists Enterprise Transition and
Sustainability Task Force. This grant program would allow Small
Business Development Centers, Women's Business Centers and veteran
centers to compete for grants to create programs that help small
businesses prepare for and cope with the mobilization of reservist-
employees and owners.
Veterans possess great technical skills and valuable leadership
experience, but they require financial resources to turn that potential
into a viable enterprise. A recent report by the Small Business
Administration stated that 22 percent of veterans plan to start or are
starting a business when they leave the military. For service-disabled
veterans, this number rises to 28 percent. So the legislation I
introduce today will create a new program, administered by the Small
Business
[[Page S4051]]
Administration, to provide very-low-interest loans, up to $100,000, to
help veterans start new small businesses.
Lastly, this bill calls for two reports from the Government
Accountability Office. One report will look at the needs of service-
disabled veterans who are interested in becoming entrepreneurs. As a
result of the war on terror and improved medicine, we are seeing more
service-disabled veterans than we have seen in decades. For some
service-disabled veterans, entrepreneurship is the best or only way of
achieving economic independence. Therefore, it is essential that we
understand and take steps to address the needs of the service-disabled
veteran entrepreneur or small business owner.
I am also calling for a study to investigate allegations that the
changes the Department of Defense has made in regard to the use of
reservists is harming the ability of reservists to find jobs and the
ability of small business owners to continue hiring reservists. At the
Committee's hearing on veteran small business issues, witnesses
testified about reservists being turned down or not considered for jobs
because they are reservists. I have heard reservists talk about being
pressured to leave the reserves if they would like to continue to
advance at work. I have also heard the concerns of small business
owners who want to support servicemembers; however, they cannot do so
if it means the survival of their business. Understanding more about
this issue is important and essential to making sure that policymakers
can continue to support citizen soldiers and the small businesses that
employ them across the Nation.
One of the issues I am not addressing in my legislation today is
Federal procurement. I heard clearly the concerns from veterans that
they are not being treated fairly when it comes to selling goods and
services to the Federal Government, and I am committed to making
changes. However, to make real changes, changes that can pass the
Senate and the House and become law, these changes must be part of a
bigger package. Legislation that addresses not just the concerns of
service-disabled veteran small business owners, but the concerns of all
small business owners who want their fair share of Federal contracts. I
am committed to taking the difficult steps necessary to address these
issues and will do so.
Mr. President, 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. 1005
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 ``Military Reservist and
Veteran Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act--
(1) the term ``activated'' means receiving an order placing
a Reservist on active duty;
(2) the term ``active duty'' has the meaning given that
term in section 101 of title 10, United States Code;
(3) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean
the Small Business Administration and the Administrator
thereof, respectively;
(4) the term ``Reservist'' means a member of a reserve
component of the Armed Forces, as described in section 10101
of title 10, United States Code;
(5) the term ``Service Corps of Retired Executives'' means
the Service Corps of Retired Executives authorized by section
8(b)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(b)(1));
(6) the terms ``service-disabled veteran'' and ``small
business concern'' have the meanings given those terms in
section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632);
(7) the term ``small business development center'' means a
small business development center described in section 21 of
the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 648); and
(8) the term ``women's business center'' means a women's
business center described in section 29 of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 656).
TITLE I--MILITARY RESERVIST LOANS
SEC. 101. GRANT ASSISTANCE FOR MILITARY RESERVISTS' SMALL
BUSINESSES.
(a) Authorization of Grants.--Section 7(b)(3)(B) of the
Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(3)(B)) is amended by
inserting ``or grants'' after ``or a deferred basis)''.
(b) Grant Specifications.--Section 7(b)(3) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(3)) is amended by inserting
after subparagraph (F) the following:
``(G) Grants made under subparagraph (B)--
``(i) may be awarded in addition to any loan made under
subparagraph (B);
``(ii) shall not exceed $25,000; and
``(iii) shall be made only to a small business concern--
``(I) that provides a business plan demonstrating viability
for not less than 3 years after the date of the application
for that grant;
``(II) with 10 or fewer employees; and
``(III) that has not received a grant under subparagraph
(B) during the 2-year period ending on the date of the
application for that grant.''.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 20(e)(2) of
the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 note) is amended by
inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
``(C) Grant assistance for military reservists' small
businesses.--There are authorized to be appropriated for
grants under section 7(b)(3)(B)--
``(i) $5,000,000 for the first fiscal year beginning after
the date of enactment of the Military Reservist and Veteran
Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2007; and
``(ii) $5,000,000 for each of the 2 fiscal years following
the fiscal year described in clause (i).''.
SEC. 102. NONCOLLATERALIZED LOANS.
Section 7(b)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
636(b)(3)) is amended by inserting after subparagraph (G), as
added by this Act, the following:
``(H)(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
Administrator may make a loan under this paragraph of not
more than $100,000 without collateral.
``(ii) The Administrator may defer payment of principal and
interest on a loan described in clause (i) during the longer
of--
``(I) the 1-year period beginning on the date of the
initial disbursement of the loan; and
``(II) the period during which the relevant essential
employee is on active duty.''.
SEC. 103. APPLICATION PERIOD.
Section 7(b)(3)(C) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C.
636(b)(3)(C)) is amended by striking ``90 days'' and
inserting ``1 year''.
SEC. 104. PREAPPROVAL PROCESS.
(a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``eligible
Reservist'' means a Reservist who--
(1) has not been ordered to active duty;
(2) expects to be ordered to active duty during a period of
military conflict (as that term is defined in section 7(n)(1)
of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(n)(1)); and
(3) can reasonably demonstrate that the small business
concern for which that Reservist is a key employee will
suffer economic injury in the absence of that Reservist.
(b) Establishment.--Not later than 6 months after the date
of enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall establish a
preapproval process, under which--
(1) the Administrator may approve a loan or grant to a
small business concern under section 7(b)(3) of the Small
Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(3)), as amended by this Act,
before an eligible Reservist employed by that small business
concern is activated; and
(2) the Administrator shall distribute funds for any loan
or grant approved under paragraph (1) if that eligible
Reservist is activated.
SEC. 105. OUTREACH AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Administrator, in consultation
with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and the Secretary of
Defense, shall develop a comprehensive outreach and technical
assistance program (in this section referred to as the
``program'') to--
(1) market the loans and grants available under section
7(b)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(3)), as
amended by this Act, to Reservists, and family members of
Reservists, that are on active duty and that are not on
active duty; and
(2) provide technical assistance to a small business
concern applying for a loan or grant under that section.
(b) Components.--The program shall--
(1) incorporate appropriate websites maintained by the
Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the
Department of Defense; and
(2) require that information on the program is made
available to small business concerns directly through--
(A) the district offices and resource partners of the
Administration, including small business development centers,
women's business centers, and the Service Corps of Retired
Executives; and
(B) other Federal agencies, including the Department of
Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 6 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, and every 6 months thereafter until
the date that is 30 months after such date of enactment, the
Administrator shall submit to Congress a report on the status
of the program.
(2) Contents.--Each report submitted under paragraph (1)
shall include--
(A) for the 6-month period before the date of that report--
(i) the number of loans and grants approved under section
7(b)(3) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)(3)), as
amended by this Act;
(ii) the number of loans and grants disbursed under that
section; and
(iii) the total amount disbursed under that section; and
(B) recommendations, if any, to make the program more
effective in serving small business concerns that employ
Reservists.
[[Page S4052]]
TITLE II--NATIONAL RESERVIST ENTERPRISE TRANSITION AND SUSTAINABILITY
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``National Reservist
Enterprise Transition and Sustainability Act of 2007''.
SEC. 202. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this title is to establish a program to--
(1) provide managerial, financial, planning, development,
technical, and regulatory assistance to small business
concerns owned and operated by Reservists;
(2) provide managerial, financial, planning, development,
technical, and regulatory assistance to the temporary heads
of small business concerns owned and operated by Reservists;
(3) create a partnership between the Small Business
Administration, the Department of Defense, and the Department
of Veterans Affairs to assist small business concerns owned
and operated by Reservists;
(4) utilize the service delivery network of small business
development centers, women's business centers, Veterans
Business Outreach Centers, and centers operated by the
National Veterans Business Development Corporation to expand
the access of small business concerns owned and operated by
Reservists to programs providing business management,
development, financial, procurement, technical, regulatory,
and marketing assistance;
(5) utilize the service delivery network of small business
development centers, women's business centers, Veterans
Business Outreach Centers, and centers operated by the
National Veterans Business Development Corporation to quickly
respond to an activation of Reservists that own and operate
small business concerns; and
(6) utilize the service delivery network of small business
development centers, women's business centers, Veterans
Business Outreach Centers, and centers operated by the
National Veterans Business Development Corporation to assist
Reservists that own and operate small business concerns in
preparing for future military activations.
SEC. 203. NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE BUSINESS ASSISTANCE.
(a) In General.--Section 21(a)(1) of the Small Business Act
(15 U.S.C. 648(a)(1)) is amended by inserting ``any small
business development center, women's business center,
Veterans Business Outreach Center, or center operated by the
National Veterans Business Development Corporation providing
enterprise transition and sustainability assistance to
Reservists under section 37,'' after ``any women's business
center operating pursuant to section 29,''.
(b) Program.--The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et
seq.) is amended--
(1) by redesignating section 37 (15 U.S.C. 631 note) as
section 38; and
(2) by inserting after section 36 the following:
``SEC. 37. RESERVIST ENTERPRISE TRANSITION AND
SUSTAINABILITY.
``(a) In General.--The Administrator shall establish a
program to provide business planning assistance to small
business concerns owned and operated by Reservists.
``(b) Definitions.--In this section--
``(1) the terms `activated' and `activation' mean having
received an order placing a Reservists on active duty, as
defined by section 101(1) of title 10, United States Code;
``(2) the term `Administrator' means the Administrator of
the Small Business Administration, acting through the
Associate Administrator for Small Business Development
Centers;
``(3) the term `Association' means the association
established under section 21(a)(3)(A);
``(4) the term `eligible applicant' means--
``(A) a small business development center that is
accredited under section 21(k);
``(B) a women's business center;
``(C) a Veterans Business Outreach Center that receives
funds from the Office of Veterans Business Development; or
``(D) an information and assistance center operated by the
National Veterans Business Development Corporation under
section 33;
``(5) the term `enterprise transition and sustainability
assistance' means assistance provided by an eligible
applicant to a small business concern owned and operated by a
Reservist, who has been activated or is likely to be
activated in the next 12 months, to develop and implement a
business strategy for the period while the owner is on active
duty and 6 months after the date of the return of the owner;
``(6) the term `Reservists' means any person who is--
``(A) a member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces,
as defined by section 10101 of title 10, United States Code;
and
``(B) on active status, as defined by section 101(d)(4) of
title 10, United States Code;
``(7) the term `small business development center' means a
small business development center as described in section 21
of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 648);
``(8) the term `State' means each of the several States of
the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and Guam;
and
``(9) the term `women's business center' means a women's
business center described in section 29 of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 656).
``(c) Authority.--The Administrator may award grants, in
accordance with the regulations developed under subsection
(d), to eligible applicants to assist small business concerns
owned and operated by Reservists by--
``(1) providing management, development, financing,
procurement, technical, regulatory, and marketing assistance;
``(2) providing access to information and resources,
including Federal and State business assistance programs;
``(3) distributing contact information provided by the
Department of Defense regarding activated Reservists to
corresponding State directors;
``(4) offering free, one-on-one, in-depth counseling
regarding management, development, financing, procurement,
regulations, and marketing;
``(5) assisting in developing a long-term plan for possible
future activation; and
``(6) providing enterprise transition and sustainability
assistance.
``(d) Rulemaking.--
``(1) In general.--The Administrator, in consultation with
the Association and after notice and an opportunity for
comment, shall promulgate regulations to carry out this
section.
``(2) Deadline.--The Administrator shall promulgate final
regulations not later than 180 days of the date of enactment
of the Military Reservist and Veteran Small Business
Reauthorization Act of 2007.
``(3) Contents.--The regulations developed by the
Administrator under this subsection shall establish--
``(A) procedures for identifying, in consultation with the
Secretary of Defense, States that have had a recent
activation of Reservists;
``(B) priorities for the types of assistance to be provided
under the program authorized by this section;
``(C) standards relating to educational, technical, and
support services to be provided by a grantee;
``(D) standards relating to any national service delivery
and support function to be provided by a grantee;
``(E) standards relating to any work plan that the
Administrator may require a grantee to develop; and
``(F) standards relating to the educational, technical, and
professional competency of any expert or other assistance
provider to whom a small business concern may be referred for
assistance by a grantee.
``(e) Application.--
``(1) In general.--Each eligible applicant desiring a grant
under this section shall submit an application to the
Administrator at such time, in such manner, and accompanied
by such information as the Administrator may reasonably
require.
``(2) Contents.--Each application submitted under paragraph
(1) shall describe--
``(A) the activities for which the applicant seeks
assistance under this section; and
``(B) how the applicant plans to allocate funds within its
network.
``(3) Matching not required.--Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of
section 21(a)(4), requiring matching funds, shall not apply
to grants awarded under this section.
``(f) Award of Grants.--
``(1) Deadline.--The Administrator shall award grants not
later than 60 days after the promulgation of final rules and
regulations under subsection (d).
``(2) Amount.--Each eligible applicant awarded a grant
under this section shall receive a grant in an amount--
``(A) not less than $150,000 per fiscal year; and
``(B) not greater than $500,000 per fiscal year.
``(g) Report.--
``(1) In general.--The Comptroller General of the United
States shall--
``(A) initiate an evaluation of the program not later than
30 months after the disbursement of the first grant under
this section; and
``(B) submit a report not later than 6 months after the
initiation of the evaluation under paragraph (1) to--
``(i) the Administrator;
``(ii) the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship
of the Senate; and
``(iii) the Committee on Small Business of the House of
Representatives.
``(2) Contents.--The report under paragraph (1) shall--
``(A) address the results of the evaluation conducted under
paragraph (1); and
``(B) recommend changes to law, if any, that it believes
would be necessary or advisable to achieve the goals of this
section.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--
``(1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this section--
``(A) $5,000,000 for the first fiscal year beginning after
the date of enactment of the Military Reservist and Veteran
Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2007; and
``(B) $5,000,000 for each of the 3 fiscal years following
the fiscal year described in subparagraph (A).
``(2) Limitation on use of other funds.--The Administrator
may carry out the program authorized by this section only
with amounts appropriated in advance specifically to carry
out this section.''.
TITLE III--VETERAN ENTREPRENEUR LOANS
SEC. 301. AUTHORIZATION.
The first sentence of section 7(a) of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 636) is amended by inserting ``new veteran
entrepreneurs under paragraph (32) and'' and after ``loans to
any qualified small business concern, including''.
[[Page S4053]]
SEC. 302. SPECIFICATIONS.
Section 7(a) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 636(a))
is amended by adding after paragraph (31) the following:
``(32) Veteran entrepreneur loans.--Each loan to a new
veteran entrepreneur under this subsection shall--
``(A) be made directly to the new veteran entrepreneur;
``(B) not exceed $100,000; and
``(C) be made at the same interest rate as loans made under
the second proviso of the unnumbered paragraph of subsection
(b).''.
SEC. 303. DEFINITIONS.
Section 3(q) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632(q))
is amended by adding after paragraph (4) the following:
``(5) New veteran entrepreneur.--The term `new veteran
entrepreneur' means a person who--
``(A) is a veteran;
``(B) is establishing a new small business concern or
established a new small business concern during the 6-month
period ending on the date of the request for a loan; and
``(C) does not own or control any other business.''.
TITLE IV--OTHER PROVISIONS
SEC. 401. INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE OFFICE OF VETERANS
BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Office of
Veterans Business Development of the Administration, to
remain available until expended--
(1) $2,100,000 for fiscal year 2008;
(2) $2,300,000 for fiscal year 2009; and
(3) $2,500,000 for fiscal year 2010.
SEC. 402. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF SBA ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON
VETERANS BUSINESS AFFAIRS.
(a) Assumption of Duties.--Section 33 of the Small Business
Act (15 U.S.C. 657c) is amended--
(1) by striking subsection (h); and
(2) by redesignating subsections (i) through (k) as
subsections (h) through (j), respectively.
(b) Permanent Extension of Authority.--Section 203 of the
Veterans Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development Act
of 1999 (15 U.S.C. 657b note) is amended by striking
subsection (h).
SEC. 403. RESERVISTS STUDY.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
submit to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives a report regarding
whether there has been a reduction in the hiring of
Reservists by business concerns because of--
(1) any increase in the use of Reservists after September
11, 2001; or
(2) any change in any policy of the Department of Defense
relating to Reservists after September 11, 2001.
SEC. 404. SERVICE-DISABLED VETERANS.
Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
submit to the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship of the Senate and the Committee on Small
Business of the House of Representatives a report
describing--
(1) the types of assistance needed by service-disabled
veterans who wish to become entrepreneurs; and
(2) any resources that would assist such service-disabled
veterans.
______
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 1006. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to deny
qualified dividend income treatment to certain foreign dividends; to
the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
will clarify which dividends are eligible for a lower rate of 15
percent for upper-income taxpayers or a 5 percent rate for lower-income
taxpayers. I am concerned that some foreign companies have a tax
advantage over their American competitors.
Since dividend rates were lowered in 2003, some banks have promoted
hybrid debt instruments from foreign corporations that may qualify for
the lower rate. These hybrid arrangements are treated as debt in the
host foreign country and the entity takes a deduction. In the United
States, these instruments are classified as equity and thus treated as
dividends eligible for the lower rate.
This was not the intention of Congress, and this abuse needs to stop.
There should not be preferences in our tax code which make it easier
for foreign corporations to raise capital at the expense of American
companies. I believe that changes need to be made to our tax system to
ensure that U.S companies can compete fairly in a global market place.
The legislation that I am introducing today is the same legislation
introduced by Ways and Means Subcommittee on Select Revenue Chairman
Neal. This legislation amends Section 1 of the Internal Revenue Code to
disallow the preferential dividends rate for payments from foreign
entities not subject to tax in the foreign country, for payments that
are deductible in the foreign country, or payments with respect to an
instrument not treated as stock in the foreign country. In addition,
the bill does not allow dividends from an entity not subject to or
exempt from corporate tax in a foreign country to be eligible for the
lower rate. If the entity is a passive foreign investment company
(PFIC), the dividend would not be eligible for the lower rate even if
the entity is also classified as a controlled foreign corporation.
This legislation builds upon a bill that Senator Baucus and I
introduced last Congress, S. 1363, which prevents dividends received
from corporations in a tax haven from receiving the lower rate. This
legislation was introduced in the 109th Congress out of concern that
the definition of qualifying foreign corporations is overly broad and
includes companies in tax haven countries with little or no tax system.
The legislation that I am introducing today includes the provisions
of S. 1363 which require that only dividends from foreign companies
which are located in countries with a comprehensive income tax and are
traded on a U.S. stock exchange may qualify for the preferential rate.
In total, this legislation carries out the intent of the 2003 rate
deduction on dividends.
The initial proposal to address dividends taxation was designed to
eliminate the double taxation of corporate earnings. Eventually, this
proposal was modified to lower the tax rate on dividends. I believe
that it was never the original intent of Congress to provide the lower
rates to dividends which are not subject to double taxation.
I urge my colleagues to support these common sense changes. I ask for
unanimous consent that the text of the 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. 1006
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. CERTAIN FOREIGN DIVIDENDS NOT TREATED AS QUALIFIED
DIVIDEND INCOME.
(a) In General.--Clause (ii) of section 1(h)(11)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to certain dividends
excluded) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
subclause (II), by striking the period at the end of
subclause (III) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the
end the following new subclause:
``(IV) any nonqualified dividend from a foreign
corporation.''.
(b) Nonqualified Dividend From a Foreign Corporation.--
Paragraph (11) of section 1(h) of such Code (relating to
dividends taxed as net capital gain) is amended by
redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (E) and by
inserting after subparagraph (C) the following new
subparagraph:
``(D) Nonqualified dividend from a foreign corporation.--
For purposes of subparagraph (B)(ii)(IV), the term
`nonqualified dividend from a foreign corporation' means any
dividend from a foreign corporation if--
``(i) any amount is allowable as a deduction to any person
at any time under the taxation law of any foreign country (or
any amount is otherwise creditable against the tax imposed
under such law) with respect to such dividend,
``(ii) for the taxable year of the corporation in which the
distribution is made, or the preceding taxable year--
``(I) such corporation is not treated as a corporation for
purposes of the taxation laws of any foreign country to which
it would be subject to tax if it were treated as a
corporation,
``(II) such corporation is exempt from tax under the
taxation laws of any foreign country to which (but for such
exemption) it would otherwise be subject to tax (except for
exemption on the basis of nonresidence, nondomicile, or
similar criteria), or
``(III) such corporation is a passive foreign investment
company (as defined in section 1297 (without regard to
subsection (e) thereof)), or
``(iii) such dividend is paid with respect to an instrument
which is treated as other than stock (or a similar equity
interest) under the taxation laws of any foreign country with
respect to which the payment is taken into account.''.
(c) Conforming Amendment.--Subparagraph (C) of section
1(h)(11) of such Code is amended by striking clause (iii) and
by redesignating clause (iv) as clause (iii).
(d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section
shall apply to dividends received after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
SEC. 2. MODIFICATION TO THE DEFINITION OF QUALIFIED FOREIGN
CORPORATION.
(a) In General.--Clause (ii) of section 1(h)(11)(C) of the
Internal Revenue Code of
[[Page S4054]]
1986 (relating to dividends on stock readily tradable on
United States securities market) is amended by striking ``by
such corporation if the stock'' and all that follows and
inserting ``by such corporation if--
``(I) the stock with respect to which such dividend is paid
is readily tradable on an established securities market in
the United States, and
``(II) such corporation is created or organized under the
laws of a foreign country which has a comprehensive income
tax system which the Secretary determines is satisfactory for
the purposes of this paragraph.''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section
shall apply to dividends received after the date of the
enactment of this Act.
______
By Mr. LUGAR:
S. 1007. A bill to direct the Secretary of State to work with the
Government of Brazil and other foreign governments to develop
partnerships that will strengthen diplomatic relations and energy
security by accelerating the development of biofuels production,
research, and infrastructure to alleviate poverty, create jobs, and
increase income, while improving energy security and protecting the
environment; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the ``United States
Brazil Energy Cooperation Pact.'' This bill would direct the Secretary
of State to work with the Government of Brazil and other foreign
governments to develop partnerships that will strengthen diplomatic
relations and energy security, including through accelerated
development of biofuels production, research and infrastructure. This
will help to alleviate poverty, create jobs, and increase income, while
improving energy security and protecting the environment..
Earlier this month President Bush and Brazilian President Luiz Inacio
Lula da Silva agreed in Sao Paulo to cooperate to promote ethanol in
the Americas as an alternative to oil. The agreement aims to increase
cooperation on biofuels technology and to develop international
biofuels standards. President Bush is following up by hosting President
da Silva at Camp David this Saturday, March 31.
President Bush intended his trip to rebuild bridges to Latin America.
Many Latin Americans are critical, even hostile, over what they see as
the administration's neglect of the region. Strained relationships
often are repaired in small steps. The ethanol accord promises mutual
benefits for the United States and Brazil, Latin America, and
potentially, the rest of the world. If executed in a spirit of
partnership and funded generously, it could have a significant regional
and global impact on the development of ethanol markets, climate change
and the ability of many poor countries to endure oil price shocks.
Although the agreement is overall a win-win-win deal for Brazil, the
United States and the region, it has been criticized. Some opponents
are simply trying to thwart better U.S.-Brazilian cooperation. But
others have raised concerns about the dislocations and unintended
consequences of promoting biofuel crops.
Only by addressing such worries and quelling the doubts can the
Brazil-U.S. pact fully meet its promise to be a launching pad for what
I envision as a transformational Americas-wide energy program that will
radically improve the hemisphere's strategic and economic posture.
Today I introduce the United States-Brazil Energy Cooperation Pact to
capitalize on the opportunity it presents to reestablish strong U.S.
relations with our neighbors while also building a more secure energy
future.
The bill calls on Brazil and the United States to help fund
feasibility studies to assess each Latin American country's biofuel
needs and biomass production potential, with special attention to food
security and the environment. By encouraging cellulosic ethanol that
does not rely on grains, it should help assuage fears, shared by
American and Latin American livestock producers alike, that excessive
reliance on corn for ethanol will further drive up animal feed costs
and thus prices of beef, pork and chicken. For Mexico, where
skyrocketing tortilla prices have been blamed on the diversion of corn
for ethanol, the bill calls for special efforts to find non-corn
sources of biofuels.
The legislation envisions a special hemispheric carbon trading system
to encourage preservation of tropical rain forests in the face of
growing demand for energy crops, and it calls on the regional
development banks, as well as U.S. foreign assistance, to support
biofuel infrastructure projects.
The bill contains special provisions to help our closest and poorest
neighbors in the Caribbean and Central America revive their moribund
sugar cane industries so they can produce their own ethanol. Currently
nearly all the ethanol they sell is processed product from Brazil.
And while biofuels are a key element of energy security, better
utilization of conventional resources also plays a role. The bill seeks
ways to help optimize Mexican oil output, which is lagging to the
detriment of both countries, and encourages South America to exploit
fully its natural gas supplies with new pipelines and liquefied natural
gas facilities.
Giving the United States easy access to foreign ethanol supplies,
even as we increase domestic production, is an essential component to
meet President Bush's target of 35 billion gallons of renewable fuels
use by 2017, which cannot be met by U.S. corn ethanol alone. U.S. corn
ethanol production will peak around 14 billion gallons in 2010, experts
estimate. Reducing dependence on oil imported from unstable and often
hostile regions is a paramount foreign policy imperative.
The U.S. doesn't tax imported oil, but currently levies a 54-cents-
per-gallon tariff on imported ethanol to protect U.S. producers from
cheaper Brazilian ethanol. It is clear that this barrier to trade in
Americas-grown fuel is inconsistent with our political goals in the
region, and with our long-term energy security.
Altering the import tax would affect a number of industries and
interests. Therefore, the bill calls for a comprehensive study on the
current political and economic impacts of the tariff and the potential
costs and benefits of repealing it or modifying it.
In this way, I believe that passage of this bill would encourage
Administration officials to rethink old policies in order to improve
energy cooperation, and encourage other Governments in the region to do
likewise. With this legislation, Congress can demonstrate to citizens
of the Americas that the U.S. is ready to embark on an equal
partnership for progress.
In conclusion, I look forward to working with each of my colleagues
to ensure the energy security of our country and the region.
______
By Mr. SANDERS:
S. 1008. A bill to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to improve and
strengthen the safety inspection process of nuclear facilities; to the
Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. SANDERS. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
would provide greater assurance to the citizens of our Nation that
their elected officials will do everything within their power to
provide the highest levels of safety at nuclear facilities. The bill
does this by allowing certain State officials to request that the
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) conduct an
independent safety assessment at key times in the life of a reactor. I
ask that the full text of the bill be printed in the Record.
Too often we have found that the NRC has been uninterested in the
legitimate concerns of national and State legislators who have
requested greater safety oversight, especially at problem-plagued
nuclear plants. In some instances, safety violations of the highest
level have been allowed to continue, undetected, for years before
discovery. Citizens deserve to have some greater assurance that when a
plant has reached what was the intended end of its useful life and has
applied for a license extension--another few decades of operating
life--or when a plant seeks an ``uprate''--an increase in power output
from what it was permitted previously--or when there have been
significant safety problems, that a facility will get a thorough review
to protect the public safety. Without this bill, the public will
continue to worry.
Under the legislation I am introducing, State officials would be able
to request that a special Independent Safety Assessment Team be
assembled to thoroughly review the safety of plants that meet the
criteria listed in
[[Page S4055]]
this bill. The team would be composed of individuals selected by the
NRC and the requesting Governor or State public utilities commission to
insure greater balance and independence on the Team. The Team's report
would make recommendations on safety features that should be improved
before additional licensing requests and other operational matters are
favorably acted upon.
My legislation offers a simple and fair solution to a technical
problem faced by citizens across the Nation and I encourage my
colleagues to join me to ensure greater safety at our nuclear
facilities.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 1008
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. INDEPENDENT SAFETY ASSESSMENTS.
Section 103 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2133) is amended by inserting after subsection d. the
following:
``e. Independent Safety Assessments.--
``(1) Development of procedure.--Not later than 90 days
after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (referred to in this subsection as the
`Commission') shall develop an independent safety assessment
procedure.
``(2) Conduct of assessment.--
``(A) Definition of eligible requestor.--In this paragraph,
the term `eligible requestor' means--
``(i) a Governor of a State in which a facility of a
licensee is located;
``(ii) a public utility commission of a State in which a
facility of a licensee is located; and
``(iii) a Governor of a State that--
``(I) because of dangers to the public relating to
potential ingestion of water or foods that have been
contaminated with radiation from a commercial nuclear power
plant, is located in an emergency planning zone, as defined
in section 350.2 of title 44, Code of Federal Regulations (or
a successor regulation); and
``(II) is not the same State in which the facility of the
licensee is located.
``(B) Request of assessment.--
``(i) In general.--At the request of an eligible requestor,
the Commission shall conduct an independent safety assessment
in accordance with the independent safety assessment
procedure developed under paragraph (1) if the licensee has--
``(I) applied to the Commission for--
``(aa) an extension of the operating license of the
licensee; or
``(bb) approval of an extended power uprate for the
licensee; or
``(II) during any 5-year period, received, under the
reactor oversight process of the Commission, 2 or more
greater-than-green inspection findings.
``(ii) Conduct of assessment.--The Commission shall conduct
an assessment requested by an eligible requestor under clause
(i) not later than 18 months after the date on which the
eligible requestor requested the assessment.
``(3) Inspection of facility.--
``(A) In general.--In conducting an independent safety
assessment under paragraph (2)(B), the Commission shall
inspect the design, construction, maintenance, and
operational safety performance of the facility of the
licensee.
``(B) Scope of inspection.--An inspection of a facility of
a licensee conducted under subparagraph (A) shall--
``(i) be at least equal in scope, depth, and breadth to the
independent safety assessment conducted in 1996 by the
Commission of the Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Plant, located
in Wiscasset, Maine; and
``(ii) include an examination of the systems of the
facility of the licensee, including--
``(I) the reactor containment systems;
``(II) the reactor emergency core cooling systems;
``(III) the control room and containment ventilation
systems;
``(IV) the electrical system (including testing of relevant
transients);
``(V) the condensate and feedwater systems;
``(VI) the spent fuel storage systems;
``(VII) any other system requested by the Governor of the
State, or a public utility commission of the State, in which
the facility of the licensee is located; and
``(VIII) any other system identified by a majority of the
members of an inspection team described in paragraph (4).
``(4) Inspection teams.--
``(A) In general.--An independent safety assessment
conducted under paragraph (2)(B) shall be conducted by an
inspection team.
``(B) Composition.--An inspection team shall be composed of
not less than 25 members, of whom--
``(i) not less than 16 members shall be--
``(I) employees of the Commission; and
``(II) unaffiliated with the regional office of the
Commission in the region in which the facility of the
licensee is located;
``(ii) not less than 6 members shall be independent
contractors who have not worked for, or at--
``(I) the facility of the licensee; or
``(II) any other nuclear power plant owned or operated by
the owner or operator of the facility of the licensee; and
``(iii) not less than 3 members shall be appointed by the
eligible requestor.
``(5) Report.--
``(A) Preparation of preliminary report.--Not later than 90
days after the date on which an inspection team completes an
independent safety assessment of a facility of a licensee
under paragraph (2)(B), the inspection team shall prepare a
preliminary report describing the findings and
recommendations of the inspection team.
``(B) Availability of preliminary report.--For a period of
90 days beginning on the date on which the inspection team
completes a preliminary report prepared under subparagraph
(A), the inspection team shall make available for review and
comment by the public a copy of the preliminary report.
``(C) Consideration of comments.--In preparing a final
version of a preliminary report developed under subparagraph
(A), the inspection team shall take into consideration any
comments received from the public that are appropriate, as
determined by the inspection team.
``(D) Submission of final version.--Not later than 90 days
after the date on which the period of review and public
comment ends under subparagraph (B), the inspection team
shall submit to the Commission a final version of the
preliminary report developed under subparagraph (A).
``(6) Affect on licensing actions.--A final decision by the
Commission of whether to extend an operating license, approve
an extended power uprate, or continue to operate under a
license at a facility of a licensee assessed under paragraph
(2)(B) shall not be made until the later of the date on
which--
``(A) the Commission has completed the independent safety
assessment of the facility of the licensee; and
``(B) the licensee has fully accepted and implemented each
finding and recommendation of the report approved by the
Commission relating to the independent safety assessment of
the facility of the licensee submitted under paragraph
(5)(D).
``(7) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized
to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $10,000,000
for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012, to remain
available until expended.''.
______
By Mr. MARTINEZ (for himself and Mr. Cornyn):
S. 1009. A bill to amend part A of title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 to improve supplemental educational
services, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. President, I am here to discuss a topic of great
meaning to American families: educating our children. We all want what
is best for our children, and to provide them with the tools they need
to succeed in tomorrow's workforce.
Today, I want to concentrate on one particular program that can play
a key role in ensuring our children are meeting their educational
goals.
I rise, along with Senator John Cornyn of Texas, to once again
introduce the Raising Achievement Through Improving Supplemental
Education Act, or the RAISE Act for short.
The RAISE Act seeks to improve the Supplemental Educational Services
program--a tutoring program under No Child Left Behind--to help it
become well-known, widely available, and easily accessible to eligible
students. It seeks to broaden eligibility requirements and
prioritization of the program to target all low-performing students
regardless of income status. The Supplemental Educational Services
program--also known as SES--was implemented as part of No Child Left
Behind and designed to be an innovative tool to help meet the academic
needs of low-income students attending continuously failing schools.
Under the program, low-income parents can elect to have free private
after-school tutoring for their children. To pay the providers of this
tutoring service, school districts would need only to use a required 20
percent allocation of their Federal funds.
By providing direct tutoring after school, the SES program can help
those students who are behind catch up with their peers. This, in turn,
also improves the overall performance of the school. But, due to the
lack of strong implementation, there have been numerous shortfalls
nationwide. This is a troubling development that the RAISE Act seeks to
correct.
For example, in the 2005-2006 school year, just 20 percent of the
eligible 2\1/2\ million students participated in SES programs. That
translates into hundreds of thousands of eligible children not being
provided with tutoring help. The funding has already been set aside--
there are children across the
[[Page S4056]]
Nation who could benefit from this after-school tutoring program--but
they have to know about it to benefit from it.
Parents and State agencies are reporting that poor communication,
delayed notification, and lack of transportation have become barriers
to their children participating in the program. Also, there were some
conflicts with other, better established after-school programs.
In Florida, we have already implemented SES improvements. As a
result, Florida is seeing stronger guidelines, better State oversight,
and consequently, higher SES program participation rate.
Many of the provisions of the RAISE Act are modeled after the
successes already occurring in my home State. And it is notable that
States such as Maryland and Indiana--where similar guidelines have been
in place longer--they are seeing a remarkable 64 to 68 percent
participation rate in their SES programs.
In our school districts where SES programs are thriving, good
communication with both parents and providers has been emphasized, as
well as access to on-site tutoring at school facilities.
Another important component of the RAISE Act is eligibility for SES.
Currently, SES targets low-income, low-performing students. I think we
should be targeting all low-performing students, regardless of income
status. By overlooking many middle-class families who do not have the
money to put their children into private tutoring or after-school
programs, many of those children are falling through the cracks.
How can we ensure that no child is being left behind unless we
specifically focus programs on those students who need the most help?
The RAISE Act was developed in consultation with school
administrators, State education officials, and non-profit and research
groups. This is a nationwide imperative and I urge my colleagues to
support this innovative set of reforms.
The RAISE Act aims to help every child in the schoolyard have an
equal opportunity for scholastic growth and achievement--this also
happens to be the fundamental purpose of No Child Left Behind.
Together, all of us in this Chamber can make the RAISE Act a reality,
and improve the academic lives of countless American schoolchildren in
need.
______
By Mr. BIDEN (for himself, Mr. Kennedy, and Mr. Enzi):
S. 1011. A bill to change the name of the National Institute on Drug
Abuse to the National Institute on Diseases of Addiction and to change
the name of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism to
the National Institute on Alcohol Disorders and Health; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, for nearly 35 years I've been working on
this floor to address the all too real public health and safety issues
associated with drug and alcohol addiction. Stiff prosecution of
trafficking and possession of illegal drugs is important; but just as
critical is an intense focus on prevention and treatment. To this end,
if we are to be successful in this fight, we--you, me, all of us--must
understand that addiction is a neurobiological disease, not a lifestyle
choice. The frank and constructive approach to help those struggling
with the disease of addiction, and to protect society from the crime
and violence that sometimes accompany drug trafficking and use, is
through treatment. We must continually work hard to resist the
counterproductive social stigma that too often brands addicts and
thereby encourages them to slip into seclusion rather than seek
treatment. As such, we must begin to change the nature of public
discourse about addiction by more appropriately naming our own research
institutes to reflect this reality: Addition is a preventable and
treatable disease.
Today, I rise to introduce legislation recognizing this reality that
addiction is a disease and not a chronic, stigmatizing life-sentence.
The Recognizing Addiction as a Disease Act of 2007 changes the names of
two institutes at the National Institutes of Health: the National
Institute on Drug Abuse will become the National Institute on Diseases
of Addiction, and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and
Alcoholism will become the National Institute on Alcohol Disorders and
Health.
These name changes accomplish two important objectives. First, they
remove the pejorative term ``abuse'' from the institutes' names and
properly help to distance that notion from the disease of addiction.
Second, the new names more clearly link the concepts of addiction and
disease, a connection that scientific study clearly supports.
Identifying addiction as a neurobiological disease will diminish the
social stigma, discrimination, and the personal shame that is often a
barrier to seeking treatment, and it will further a common
understanding of diseases of addiction.
The 2005 National Survey on Drug Use and Health reported that
addiction affects 23.2 million Americans in our country, of whom only
about 10 percent are receiving the treatment they need. Many are
deterred from seeking such treatment because of the social stigma
associated with admitting to a drug or alcohol dependency. This bill is
a small but important step towards remedying this problem, fighting
drug use, and successfully treating addiction.
Addiction is now understood to be a disease because scientific
research has shown that alcohol and other drugs can change the brain's
structure and function. Advances in brain imaging science now make it
possible to see inside an addict's brain and pinpoint the parts of the
brain affected by drugs or alcohol. These insights will enable the
development of new approaches to prevention and treatment. In fact, we
now have data indicating that excessive alcohol use and alcohol
dependence (alcoholism) are not separate diagnostic categories, but
exist along a single continuum of alcohol-disorders associated with
increased frequency of a harmful drinking pattern.
Today's introduction of this legislation is timely. Two weeks ago HBO
premiered an important new documentary movie, Addiction, which presents
an encouraging look at addiction as a treatable disease and the film
chronicles the major scientific advances that have helped us better
understand and treat addiction. The Institutes collaborated with HBO to
create this eye-opening documentary that seeks to help Americans
understand addiction. HBO's Addiction Project will acquaint viewers
with available evidence-based medical and behavioral treatments. This
is especially important for disorders like addiction that for many
years were treated outside the medical mainstream. From emergency rooms
to living rooms to research laboratories, the documentary follows the
trail of an illness that affects one in four families in the United
States.
The facts surrounding addiction are self-evident. With nearly 1 in 10
Americans over the age of 12 suffering from some form of substance
dependency, addiction takes an emotional, psychological, and social
toll on the country. The economic costs of substance dependency and
addiction alone are estimated to exceed a half trillion dollars
annually in the United States due to health care expenditures, lost
productivity, and crime.
I am proud to say that my friends and very distinguished colleagues
Senators Kennedy and Enzi, chairman and ranking member of the Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, respectively, are cosponsors
of this important bill.
Today, the Recognizing Addiction as a Disease Act of 2007 takes a
small but important stride towards helping those struggling with
diseases of addiction.
______
By Mr. COCHRAN (for himself and Mr. Rockefeller):
S. 1015. A bill to reauthorize the National Writing Project; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. COCHRAN. Mr. President, today I am joined by my distinguished
colleague and friend from West Virginia, Mr. Rockefeller, in
introducing the National Writing Project Act of 2007. The National
Writing Project remains the only Federal program to improve the
teaching of writing in America's classrooms.
Writing is complex, challenging and it is a basic component of
literacy. And, literacy is essential for success in life. A Belden
Russonello & Stewart poll announced yesterday that overwhelmingly,
Americans want writing taught throughout school curriculum.
[[Page S4057]]
Research shows that students taught by Writing Project demonstrate more
improvement and higher overall writing performance than their peers.
Writing is not confined to thesis papers, college essays, and book
reports. Writing skills for employment in the 21st Century require not
only the grammar, construction and analytical thought of traditional
writing, but the skills needed to communicate effectively using new
technology. Effective instruction in writing requires teachers with
high ability, who continuously develop their teaching skills.
A United States Department of Education program since 1991 and nearly
200 nation-wide, university based sites, the National Writing Project
annually serves over 140,000 educators through more than 7,000
programs. It is based on a model of teachers teaching teachers:
experienced teachers who share and develop the latest and most
successful instruction techniques who in turn lead similar local
workshops and training sessions for their colleagues.
National Writing Project teachers will be here this week to tell
their personal stories and provide other information about what the
College Board's National Commission on Writing calls ``arguably the
most successful teacher network in the United States.'' I hope all
Senators will have the opportunity to visit with teachers from their
State and I invite all Senators to join Mr. Rockefeller and me in
sponsoring this bill.
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. 1015
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 ``National Writing Project Act
of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) The United States is facing a continuing crisis in
writing in schools and in the workplace.
(2) The writing problem has been magnified by the rapidly
changing student population, the growing number of English
language learners, the increasing numbers of adolescents who
are low-achieving writers, the shortage of adequately trained
teachers, and the specialized knowledge required of teachers
to teach students with special needs who are now part of
mainstream classrooms.
(3) Nationwide reports show that nearly one-third of high
school graduates are not ready for college-level English
composition courses.
(4) Writing is a threshold skill for both employment and
promotion. Deficiencies in writing skills have resulted in
annual private sector costs for providing writing training
that are as high as $3,100,000,000.
(5) Writing is a central feature in State and school
district education standards in all disciplines.
(6) Since 1973, the only national program to address the
writing problem in the Nation's schools has been the National
Writing Project, a network of collaborative university-school
programs.
(7) Evaluations of the National Writing Project document
significant gains in student performance in writing and
effective classroom practices.
(8) The National Writing Project has become a model for
programs to improve teaching in such other fields as
mathematics, science, history, civics and government,
geography, reading and literature, technology, performing
arts, and foreign languages.
(9) Each year, more than 135,000 teachers directly benefit
from National Writing Project programs in nearly 200 sites
located in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin
Islands.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF THE NATIONAL WRITING PROJECT.
Subpart 2 of part C of title II of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6701 et seq.) is
amended to read as follows:
``Subpart 2--National Writing Project
``SEC. 2331. PURPOSES.
``The purposes of this subpart are--
``(1) to support and promote the expansion of the National
Writing Project network of sites so that teachers in every
region of the United States will have access to a National
Writing Project program;
``(2) to ensure the consistent high quality of the sites
through ongoing review, evaluation, and technical assistance;
``(3) to support and promote the establishment of programs
to disseminate effective practices and research findings
about the teaching of writing; and
``(4) to coordinate activities assisted under this subpart
with activities assisted under this Act.
``SEC. 2332. NATIONAL WRITING PROJECT.
``(a) Authorization.--The Secretary is authorized to award
a grant to the National Writing Project, a nonprofit
educational organization that has as its primary purpose the
improvement of the quality of student writing and learning
(hereafter in this section referred to as the `grantee`) to
improve the teaching of writing and the use of writing as a
part of the learning process in our Nation's classrooms.
``(b) Requirements of Grant.--The grant shall provide
that--
``(1) the grantee will enter into contracts with
institutions of higher education or other nonprofit
educational providers (hereafter in this section referred to
as `contractors') under which the contractors will agree to
establish, operate, and provide the non-Federal share of the
cost of teacher training programs in effective approaches and
processes for the teaching of writing;
``(2) funds made available by the Secretary to the grantee
pursuant to any contract entered into under this section will
be used to pay the Federal share of the cost of establishing
and operating teacher training programs as provided in
paragraph (1); and
``(3) the grantee will meet such other conditions and
standards as the Secretary determines to be necessary to
assure compliance with the provisions of this section and
will provide such technical assistance as may be necessary to
carry out the provisions of this section.
``(c) Teacher Training Programs.--The teacher training
programs described in subsection (b) shall--
``(1) be conducted during the school year and during the
summer months;
``(2) train teachers who teach grades kindergarten through
college;
``(3) select teachers to become members of a National
Writing Project teacher network whose members will conduct
writing workshops for other teachers in the area served by
each National Writing Project site; and
``(4) encourage teachers from all disciplines to
participate in such teacher training programs.
``(d) Federal Share.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2) or
(3) and for purposes of subsection (b), the term Federal
share' means, with respect to the costs of teacher training
programs described in subsection (b), 50 percent of such
costs to the contractor.
``(2) Waiver.--The Secretary may waive the provisions of
paragraph (1) on a case-by-case basis if the National
Advisory Board described in subsection (e) determines, on the
basis of financial need, that such waiver is necessary.
``(3) Maximum.--The Federal share of the costs of teacher
training programs conducted pursuant to subsection (b) may
not exceed $150,000 for any one contractor, or $300,000 for a
statewide program administered by any one contractor in at
least five sites throughout the State.
``(e) National Advisory Board.--
``(1) Establishment.--The National Writing Project shall
establish and operate a National Advisory Board.
``(2) Composition.--The National Advisory Board established
pursuant to paragraph (1) shall consist of--
``(A) national educational leaders;
``(B) leaders in the field of writing; and
``(C) such other individuals as the National Writing
Project determines necessary.
``(3) Duties.--The National Advisory Board established
pursuant to paragraph (1) shall--
``(A) advise the National Writing Project on national
issues related to student writing and the teaching of
writing;
``(B) review the activities and programs of the National
Writing Project; and
``(C) support the continued development of the National
Writing Project.
``(f) Evaluation.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct an
independent evaluation by grant or contract of the teacher
training programs administered pursuant to this subpart. Such
evaluation shall specify the amount of funds expended by the
National Writing Project and each contractor receiving
assistance under this section for administrative costs. The
results of such evaluation shall be made available to the
appropriate committees of Congress.
``(2) Funding limitation.--The Secretary shall reserve not
more than $150,000 from the total amount appropriated
pursuant to the authority of subsection (h) for fiscal year
2008 and each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years to conduct the
evaluation described in paragraph (1).
``(g) Application Review.--
``(1) Review board.--The National Writing Project shall
establish and operate a National Review Board that shall
consist of--
``(A) leaders in the field of research in writing; and
``(B) such other individuals as the National Writing
Project determines necessary.
``(2) Duties.--The National Review Board shall--
``(A) review all applications for assistance under this
subsection; and
``(B) recommend applications for assistance under this
subsection for funding by the National Writing Project.
``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subpart
$30,000,000 for fiscal year 2008 and such sums as may be
necessary for each of the 5 succeeding fiscal years.''.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to join my distinguished
colleague, Senator Thad Cochran, in
[[Page S4058]]
sponsoring the reauthorization of the National Writing Project. We have
worked together for many years on the wonderful program that supports
teachers and quality writing. Senator Cochran has long been one of this
body's strongest advocates for not only the NWP, but for education in
general. His leadership is quiet and effective, and truly inspiring.
The National Writing Project, NWP, provides our teachers with
professional development to enhance their skills and in turn those
teachers bring new skills and new enthusiasm to their classrooms and
their students. Over 141,000 educators annually go through the NWP and
become invaluable resources to millions of children nationwide. The NWP
is at the forefront in the efforts to improve our schools for teachers
and students.
The NWP is not only a great idea in theory but it has a record of
success by consistently delivering results that can be seen in our
classrooms. Students in NWP classrooms have shown demonstrably improved
ability to organize and develop ideas in writing. A study published in
January 2006 concluded that students whose teachers underwent NWP
training uniformly demonstrated positive results.
Every State participates in the program. West Virginia has benefited
tremendously from this program. The three sites in my State are Central
West Virginia Writing Project, Marshall University Graduate College in
South Charleston, the Marshall University Writing Project in
Huntington, and the National Writing Project at West Virginia
University in Morgantown. I am particularly proud of the leadership at
Marshall University on its Technology Project to explore ways to better
integrate technology into writing and classroom education. During the
2005-2006 school year the NWP conducted more than 140 programs serving
over 3,000 teachers.
The NWP is a perfect example of how the public and the private sector
should work in partnership to improve our society. The NWP operating
budget comes not only from the Federal Government but from in kind
contribution from colleges and universities.
Programs like the NWP are an essential part strengthening our
education system, and it deserves our continued support.
______
By Mr. McCONNELL (for Mr. Enzi (for himself, Mr. Dorgan, Mr.
Grassley, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Conrad)):
S. 1017. A bill to amend the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921, to
prohibit the use of certain anti-competitive forward contracts; to the
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, Wyoming's late, great country music star
Chris LeDoux has a song Some Things Never Change. I wish that were the
case for Wyoming's hardworking livestock producers. As production
agriculture has evolved and improved in the United States, producers in
Wyoming continue to be held hostage to a regulatory nightmare and bound
by the chains of unfair and manipulative marketing contracts. It is
this regulatory nightmare that must be addressed. That is why I am
reintroducing legislation today to break the chains and require
livestock contracts to contain a fixed base price and be traded in
open, public markets.
From Kaycee to Kansas City, captive supply is destroying the health
of our family ranches. Many of these small businesses have operated for
generations. Unfortunately, a handshake and an honest day's labor
cannot compete with deceptive business practices. Captive supply is a
business practice not well known to those outside of the industry, but
a practice that has had a tremendous impact on the ranchers of the
West.
I go back to Wyoming almost every weekend. Because Wyoming is such a
large State, my travels take me to a different section of the State on
each trip. Throughout Wyoming I hear the same concerns from my
constituents. They are all clamoring for attention and relief so they
can continue the work that so many in their families have done for so
many years. These concerns are not unique to Wyoming. Captive supply is
an industry-wide problem.
So what is captive supply--and how is it harming our Nation's
ranchers to such an extent? Simply put, captive supply refers to the
ownership by meat packers of cattle or the contracts they issue to
purchase livestock. It is done to ensure that packers will always have
a consistent supply of livestock on the kill floor which keeps
slaughterhouses in perpetual operation.
The original goal of captive supply makes good business sense. All
businesses want to maintain a steady supply of animals to ensure a
constant stream of production and control costs.
But captive supply allows packers to go beyond good organization and
business performance--to market manipulation--and this is where the
problem lies.
The packing industry is highly concentrated. Using captive supply and
the market power of concentration, packers can purposefully drive down
the prices by refusing to buy in the open market. This deflates all
livestock prices and limits the market access of producers that have
not aligned with specific packers.
We made an attempt to address the problem of captive supply on the
Senate floor during the 2002 Farm Bill debate, but the amendment to ban
packer ownership of livestock more than 14 days before slaughter did
not survive the conference committee deliberation. I look forward to
working with my colleagues on the reauthorization of the Farm Bill this
year. I will press this issue during the drafting of the Competition
Title of the Farm Bill with my congressional colleagues.
The problems caused by captive supply are alive and well, just as
Wyoming producers have testified to me in the phone calls, letters,
faxes and emails I receive from them. Although I supported the packer
ban and have cosponsored it again this Congress, I do not think that
banning packer ownership of livestock will solve the entire captive
supply problem. Packers are using numerous methods beyond direct
ownership to control cattle and other livestock.
Currently, packers maintain captive supply through various means
including direct ownership, forward contracts, and marketing
agreements. The difference between the three is subtle, so let me take
a moment to describe how they differ. Direct ownership refers to
livestock owned by the packer. In forward contracts, producers agree to
the delivery of cattle one week or more before slaughter with the price
determined before slaughter. Forward contracts are typically fixed,
meaning the base price is set.
As with forward contracts, marketing agreements also call for the
delivery of livestock more than one week before slaughter, but the
price is determined at or after slaughter. A formula pricing method is
commonly used for cattle sold under marketing agreements. In formula
pricing, instead of a fixed base price, an external reference price,
such as the average price paid for cattle at a certain packing plant
during one week, is used to determine the base price of the cattle. I
find this very disturbing because the packer has the ability to
manipulate the weekly average at a packing plant by refusing to buy in
the open market. Unfortunately, marketing agreements and formula
pricing are much more common than forward contracts.
Livestock producers have the same questions when they lose to the
market pressures applied by captive supply. Captive supply gives
packers the ability to discriminate against some producers. And those
producers pay for it with their bottom line. At the same time, packers
use contracts and marketing agreements to give privileged access and
premiums to other producers regardless of the quality of their product.
These uses of captive supply should be illegal. In fact, they are.
Section 202 of the Packers and Stockyards Act states in (3) (a) and
(b):
``It shall be unlawful for any packer with respect to livestock . . .
to:
``(a) Engage in or use any unfair, unjustly discriminatory, or
deceptive practice or device; or
``(b) Make or give any undue or unreasonable preference or advantage
to any particular person or locality in any respect, or subject any
particular person or locality to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or
disadvantage in any respect.''
Packers that practice price discrimination toward some producers and
provide undue preferences to other producers are clearly in violation
of the
[[Page S4059]]
law. But this law is not being enforced. So what we are left with are
unenforced laws or no laws at all to protect the independent producer.
The Packers and Stockyards Act is not being enforced and the cost of
enforcing the law on a case-by-case basis in the courts is expensive
and time-consuming.
A law is not worth the paper it is printed on if it is not enforced.
The posted speed limit is not a suggestion. Our law enforcement
officers enforce the law when motorists fail to heed the posted sign.
This section of the Packers and Stockyards Act is like a sign on the
road of commerce that no one is paying attention to because the police
are busy doing something else. The bill I am introducing today is not
just another sign on the road. It is a speed bump. It does not just
warn cars to go slower; it makes it much more difficult for them to
speed.
My bill does two things to create the speed bump. It requires that
livestock producers have a fixed base price in their contracts. It also
puts these contracts up for bid in the open market where they belong.
Under this bill, forward contracts and marketing agreements must
contain a fixed base price on the day the contract is signed. This
prevents packers from manipulating the base price after the point of
sale. You may hear allegations that this bill ends quality-driven
production, but it does not prevent adjustments to the base price after
slaughter for quality, grade or other factors outside packer control.
It prevents packers from changing the base price based on factors that
they do control. Contracts that are based on the futures market are
also exempted from the bill's requirements.
In an open market, buyers and sellers would have the opportunity to
bid against each other for contracts and could witness bids that are
made and accepted. Whether they take the opportunity to bid or not is
their choice, the key here is that they have access to do so.
My bill also limits the size of contracts to the rough equivalent of
a load of livestock, meaning 40 cattle or 30 swine. It does not limit
the number of contracts that can be offered by an individual. This key
portion prevents small and medium-sized livestock producers, like those
found in Wyoming, from being shut out of deals that contain thousands
of livestock per contract.
Requiring a firm base price and an open and transparent market ends
the potential for price discrimination, price manipulation and undue
preferences. These are not the only benefits of my bill. It also
preserves the very useful risk management tool that contracts provide
to livestock producers. Contracts help producers plan and prepare for
the future. My bill makes contracts and marketing agreements an even
better risk management tool because it solidifies the base price for
the producer. Once the agreement is made, a producer can have
confidence on shipping day in his ability to feed his family during the
next year because he will know in advance how much he can expect to
receive for his livestock.
This bill also encourages electronic trading. An open and public
market would function much like the stock market, where insider trading
is prohibited. The stock market provides a solid example of how
electronic livestock trading can work to the benefit of everyone
involved. For example, price discovery in an open and electronic market
is automatic.
Captive supply is still weighing on the minds and hurting the
pocketbooks of ranchers in Wyoming and across the United States.
Wyoming ranchers encourage me to keep up the good fight on this issue
on every trip I make to my home state. The economic soul of Wyoming is
built on the foundation of small towns and small businesses. All
livestock producers, even small and medium-sized ones, should have a
fair chance to compete that allows them to get the best price possible
for their product. We must do everything we can to keep our small
producers in business.
My bill removes one of the largest obstructions preventing livestock
producers from competing--formula-priced contracts. I ask my colleagues
to assist me in giving their constituents and mine the chance to
perform on a level playing field.
While Some Things Never Change, it is time for a sea change in the
area of captive supply.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Hagel, and Mrs. Feinstein):
S. 1018. A bill to address security risks posed by global climate
change and for other purposes; to the Select Committee on Intelligence.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today, Senator Hagel and I introduced the
bipartisan Global Climate Change Security Oversight Act. We were joined
by Senator Feinstein. Our bill states that the consequences of global
climate change represent a clear and present danger to the security of
the United States.
For years, many of us have examined global warming as an
environmental or economic issue. We also need to consider it as a
security concern. Our bill begins this process by requiring a National
Intelligence Estimate to assess the strategic challenges presented by
the world's changing climate.
The National Security Strategy of 2006 stated that the United States
now faces new security challenges, including ``environmental
destruction, whether caused by human behavior or cataclysmic mega-
disasters such as floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, or tsunamis.
Problems of this scope may overwhelm the capacity of local authorities
to respond, and may even overtax national militaries, requiring a
larger international response. These challenges are not traditional
national security concerns, such as the conflict of arms or ideologies.
But if left unaddressed they can threaten national security.''
Global climate change represents one of the new environmental
challenges outlined in the National Security Strategy that poses a
threat to our national security. Failing to recognize and plan for the
geopolitical challenges of global warming would represent a serious
mistake.
A National Intelligence Estimate is a comprehensive review of a
potential security threat that combines, correlates and evaluates
intelligence from all of the relevant U.S. intelligence agencies.
Various intelligence agencies--the CIA, NSA, the Pentagon, FBI, etc.
must pool data, share perspectives and work together to assemble an
accurate picture of threats to U.S. security.
Without an NIE, the various agencies may never have an opportunity to
examine each other's data, and any differences or similarities between
the reports could provide important information for policymakers.
In this legislation, we ask for the intelligence community to provide
a strategic estimate of the risks posed by global climate change for
countries or regions that are of particular economic or military
significance to the United States or that are at serious risk of
humanitarian suffering. This NIE will assess the political, social,
agricultural, and economic challenges for countries and their likely
impact.
Every region will be affected differently by global warming and it is
critical that our intelligence and military communities are prepared to
handle the situations most likely to arise.
For example, rising sea levels will have a profound impact on low
lying coastal areas, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. This region
is home to 58 percent of the world's population and 57 percent of the
world's poorest population. More than 5 million people live in major
cities that are in low lying coastal areas.
People in the Asia-Pacific region already endure coastal natural
disasters, such as tsunamis, and inland flooding. Between 2001 and
2005, 62,273 people were killed annually by water related disasters in
this region. This number is only going to increase as the world warms.
Africa is a place where changes in precipitation patterns will be
particularly devastating. Many areas are already under enormous stress
from drought and hunger. In 2005, 30 million people in 34 countries
confronted food shortages as a result of drought. It is estimated that
the droughts will become more severe and impact more people if the
temperature continues to rise.
Environmental changes caused by global warming represent a potential
threat multiplier for instability around the world. Scarce water, for
example, may exacerbate conflict along economic, ethnic, or sectarian
divisions.
[[Page S4060]]
Water shortages, food insecurity, or flooding all of which may occur as
a result of rising global temperatures could also displace people,
forcing them to migrate. Many of the most severe effects of global
warming are expected in regions where fragile governments are least
capable of responding to them.
This NIE will examine these questions and more. It will also do
something that we don't do often enough here in Congress: it will look
beyond the near horizon of the next election or the next few years and
require the intelligence community to think about these issues in the
context of the next 30 years.
The bill we introduced today will also fund additional research by
the Department of Defense in order to examine the impact of climate
change on military operations.
Rising temperatures are altering the international environment. We
need to be prepared for this new world.
We hope that our colleagues will join us in this bipartisan effort to
assess the strategic implications of climate change. The scientific
community has demonstrated that the earth is growing warmer. We are
asking the intelligence community to analyze the geopolitical
implications of these changes.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1018
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 ``Global Climate Change
Security Oversight Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, in 2007 the average annual temperature in the
United States and around the global is approximately 1.0
degree Fahrenheit warmer than at the start of the 20th
century, and the rate of warming has accelerated during the
past 30 years, increasing globally since the mid-1970s. The
fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change has predicted that the Earth will warm 0.72
degrees Fahrenheit during the next 2 decades with current
emission trends.
(2) The annual national security strategy report submitted
pursuant to section 108 of the National Security Act of 1947
(50 U.S.C. 404a) for 2006 states that the United States faces
new security challenges, including ``environmental
destruction, whether caused by human behavior or cataclysmic
mega-disasters such as floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, or
tsunamis. Problems of this scope may overwhelm the capacity
of local authorities to respond, and may even overtax
national militaries, requiring a larger international
response. These challenges are not traditional national
security concerns, such as the conflict of arms or
ideologies. But if left unaddressed they can threaten
national security.''.
(3) According to the fourth assessment report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, average
temperature increases of between 2 and 4 degrees Celsius over
preindustrial levels are projected to cause the sea level to
rise by between 2 and 4 meters by 2100 due to melting of the
Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.
(4) In 2007, more than 200,000,000 people live in coastal
floodplains around the world and 2,000,000 square kilometers
of land and an estimated $1,000,000,000,000 worth of assets
are less than a 1-meter elevation above sea level.
(5) An estimated 1,700,000,000 people in the world live in
areas where water is scarce and in 25 years that population
is projected to increase to 5,400,000,000. Climate change
will impact the hydrological cycle and change the location,
time of year, and intensity of water availability.
(6) The report of the World Health Organization entitled
``The World Health Report 2002: Reducing Risks and Promoting
Healthy Life'' states that ``Effects of climate change on
human health can be expected to be mediated through complex
interactions of physical, ecological, and social factors.
These effects will undoubtedly have a greater impact on
societies or individuals with scarce resources, where
technologies are lacking, and where infrastructure and
institutions (such as the health sector) are least able to
adapt.''.
(7) Environmental changes relating to global climate change
represent a potentially significant threat multiplier for
instability around the world as changing precipitation
patterns may exacerbate competition and conflict over
agricultural, vegetative, and water resources and displace
people, thus increasing hunger and poverty and causing
increased pressure on fragile countries.
(8) The strategic, social, political, and economic
consequences of global climate change are likely to have a
greater adverse effect on less developed countries with fewer
resources and infrastructures that are less able to adjust to
new economic and social pressures, and where the margin for
governance and survival is thin.
(9) The consequences of global climate change represent a
clear and present danger to the security and economy of the
United States.
(10) A failure to recognize, plan for, and mitigate the
strategic, social, political, and economic effects of a
changing climate will have an adverse impact on the national
security interests of the United States.
SEC. 3. NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE ON GLOBAL CLIMATE
CHANGE.
(a) Requirement for National Intelligence Estimate.--
(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), not
later than 270 days after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Director of National Intelligence shall submit to
Congress a National Intelligence Estimate on the anticipated
geopolitical effects of global climate change and the
implications of such effects on the national security of the
United States.
(2) Notice regarding submittal.--If the Director of
National Intelligence determines that the National
Intelligence Estimate required by paragraph (1) cannot be
submitted by the date set out in that paragraph, the Director
shall notify Congress and provide--
(A) the reasons that the National Intelligence Estimate
cannot be submitted by such date; and
(B) an estimated date for the submittal of the National
Intelligence Estimate.
(b) Content.--The Director of National Intelligence shall
prepare the National Intelligence Estimate required by this
section using the mid-range projections of the fourth
assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change--
(1) to assess the political, social, agricultural, and
economic risks during the 30-year period beginning on the
date of enactment of this Act posed by global climate change
for countries or regions that are--
(A) of strategic economic or military importance to the
United States and at risk of significant impact due to global
climate change; or
(B) at significant risk of large-scale humanitarian
suffering with cross-border implications as predicted on the
basis of the assessments;
(2) to assess other risks posed by global climate change,
including increased conflict over resources or between ethnic
groups, within countries or transnationally, increased
displacement or forced migrations of vulnerable populations
due to inundation or other causes, increased food insecurity,
and increased risks to human health from infectious disease;
(3) to assess the capabilities of the countries or regions
described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) to
respond to adverse impacts caused by global climate change;
(4) to assess the strategic challenges and opportunities
posed to the United States by the risks described in
paragraph (1);
(5) to assess the security implications and opportunities
for the United States economy of engaging, or failing to
engage successfully, with other leading and emerging major
contributors of greenhouse gas emissions in efforts to reduce
emissions; and
(6) to make recommendations for further assessments of
security consequences of global climate change that would
improve national security planning.
(c) Coordination.--In preparing the National Intelligence
Estimate under this section, the Director of National
Intelligence shall consult with representatives of the
scientific community, including atmospheric and climate
studies, security studies, conflict studies, economic
assessments, and environmental security studies, the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of State, the
Administrator of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric
Administration, the Administrator of the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, the Administrator of the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Secretary of Energy, and
the Secretary of Agriculture, and, if appropriate,
multilateral institutions and allies of the United States
that have conducted significant research on global climate
change.
(d) Form.--The National Intelligence Estimate required by
this section shall be submitted in unclassified form, to the
extent consistent with the protection of intelligence sources
and methods, and include unclassified key judgments of the
National Intelligence Estimate. Such National Intelligence
Estimate may include a classified annex.
SEC. 4. RESPONSE TO THE NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE ESTIMATE.
(a) Report by the Secretary of Defense.--Not later than 270
days after the date that the National Intelligence Estimate
required by section 3 is submitted to Congress, the Secretary
of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Appropriations,
the Committee on Armed Services, and the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate and the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on Armed Services, and the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of
Representatives a report on--
(1) the projected impact on the military installations and
capabilities of the United States of the effects of global
climate change as assessed in the National Intelligence
Estimate;
(2) the projected impact on United States military
operations of the effects of global climate change described
in the National Intelligence Estimate; and
[[Page S4061]]
(3) recommended research and analysis needed to further
assess the impacts on the military of global climate change.
(b) Sense of Congress on the Next Quadrennial Defense
Review.--It is the sense of Congress that the Secretary of
Defense should address the findings of the National
Intelligence Estimate required by section 3 regarding the
impact of global climate change and potential implications of
such impact on the Armed Forces and for the size,
composition, and capabilities of Armed Forces in the next
Quadrennial Defense Review.
(c) Report by the Secretary of State.--Not later than 270
days after the date that the National Intelligence Estimate
required by section 3 is submitted to Congress, the Secretary
of State shall submit to the Committee on Appropriations, the
Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Select Committee on
Intelligence of the Senate and the Committee on
Appropriations, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of
Representatives a report that addresses--
(1) the potential for large migration flows in countries of
strategic interest or humanitarian concern as a response to
changes in climate and the implications for United States
security interests; and
(2) the potential for diplomatic opportunities and
challenges facing United States policy makers as a result of
social, economic, or political responses of groups or nations
to global changing climate.
SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF RESEARCH.
(a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense is authorized to
carry out research on the impacts of global climate change on
military operations, doctrine, organization, training,
material, logistics, personnel, and facilities and the
actions needed to address those impacts. Such research may
include--
(1) the use of war gaming and other analytical exercises;
(2) analysis of the implications for United States defense
capabilities of large-scale Arctic sea-ice melt and broader
changes in Arctic climate;
(3) analysis of the implications for United States defense
capabilities of abrupt climate change;
(4) analysis of the implications of the findings derived
from the National Intelligence Estimate required in section 3
Act for United States defense capabilities;
(5) analysis of the strategic implications for United
States defense capabilities of direct physical threats to the
United States posed by extreme weather events such as
hurricanes; and
(6) analysis of the existing policies of the Department of
Defense to assess the adequacy of the Department's
protections against climate risks to United States
capabilities and military interests in foreign countries.
(b) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date that the
National Intelligence Estimate required by section 3 is
submitted to Congress, the Secretary of Defense shall submit
to Congress a report on the results of the research, war
games, and other activities carried out pursuant to
subsection (a).
SEC. 6. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be
necessary to carry out this Act.
Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President. I rise today to join Senator Durbin in
introducing the Global Climate Change Security Oversight Act.
Global climate change has implications beyond economic, environmental
and energy policies. It has the potential to affect every aspect of our
daily lives. It is because of the possible broad impact on U.S.
interests at home and abroad that I have agreed to be the lead
Republican co-sponsor on the Global Climate Change Security Oversight
Act.
Senator Durbin and I differ on policy initiatives designed to reduce
the impact of climate change. We do agree, however, on the need to
assess potential impacts of the changing climate on U.S. national
security interests so that our Nation can develop responsible, forward-
thinking policies that ensure the continued safety and prosperity of
the American people.
There will always be uncertainties and incomplete information in
climate science. This is the nature of scientific discovery; it is
constantly evolving, constantly gaining new insights and explanations
of our natural world. National policy must be crafted based on what is
known, but also must be able to incorporate the uncertainties of what
is yet to be learned.
Our bill provides a foundation for future policy options. It
instructs the Director of National Intelligence to conduct a National
Intelligence Estimate to assess the potential geopolitical effects of
global climate change and the implications for U.S. national security.
It asks for a risk assessment of a broad array of impacts based on
current scientific understanding. This bill is intended to gather
information about the national security implications of projected
climate change, so that in the future, Congress can develop policies
that protect U.S. interests around the world.
I have said that the debate is not about whether we should take
action, but rather what kind of action we should take. It would be
irresponsible to attempt to develop a response to the physical effects
of climate change without knowing what the potential consequences are.
Our actions should always be based on a comprehensive base of
scientific information and knowledge. Without this kind of information,
we cannot effectively determine what the risks to U.S. national
security will be. We cannot realistically design policies that mitigate
these risks without this information. General Charles F. ``Chuck''
Wald, USAF, ret., former Deputy Commander, Headquarters U.S. European
Command, has stated, ``This bipartisan legislation takes on an
important emerging policy issue--the impact of climate change and
national security. I support its call for a national intelligence
estimate of the topic and authorizing the Secretary of Defense to
conduct further research on the military impact of climate change.''
As I have said for many years, the way forward is to responsibly
address the issue of climate change with a national strategy that
incorporates economic, environmental and energy priorities. These
issues are inextricably linked and changes to one will effect the other
two. These priorities are also an integral part of U.S. national
security. Risk assessment is essential to putting our national
resources in the places where they will be most effective. This is even
more important when assessing risk to national security. This
legislation will provide information we need to continue to help make
our country secure in the years to come.
____________________