[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 158 (Thursday, October 18, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Pages S13080-S13099]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself, Mr. Warner, Mr. Harkin, Mr.
Coleman, Mrs. Dole, Ms. Collins, Mr. Cardin, Ms. Klobuchar, and
Mr. Casey):
S. 2191. A bill to direct the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency to establish a program to decrease emissions of
greenhouse gases, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, for me, today is one of the most important
days in my career because, with the introduction of the Lieberman-
Warner bill, today will be remembered, in my view, as the turning point
in the fight against global warming. Let me explain why I make that
very sweeping statement.
First, this bill represents a bipartisan breakthrough on the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee. When I took the gavel of the
committee 9 months ago, I said that global warming was the challenge of
our generation, a challenge that I believed our committee could meet
with knowledge, with bipartisanship, and in pursuit of that knowledge
we have held 18 global warming hearings and 2 scientific briefings this
year in the Environment Committee.
At our very first hearing in January, we invited all Senators to come
to the committee and share their perspectives. More than one-third of
the Senate took part in that historic event. Since then, we have heard
from more than 120 witnesses, ranging from utility executives, Silicon
Valley entrepreneurs, venture capitalists, religious leaders, and Nobel
Prize winners. Indeed, yes, we had Al Gore, we had members of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and we also heard from
business community leaders who have formed the U.S. Climate Action
Partnership. We heard from mayors, Governors, and leaders of both
parties, from many different States, cities, and counties across
America.
Then a wonderful thing happened: Senator John Warner, who is the
ranking member on Senator Lieberman's Global Warming Subcommittee,
decided it was time that he play a lead role in crafting a landmark
environmental law which will take its place beside the Clean Air Act,
the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and other great
bipartisan environmental legislation.
Senator Warner, this decision of yours is giving heart and hope to
literally not only the people of the United States of America but all
the people who share our planet. I know in your beautiful State of
Virginia how proud they are. We had a hearing with you and with
Senators Mikulski and Cardin, and we heard about the impact of global
warming already taking place on the Chesapeake. Your Governor was also
there. So this is a great moment.
I cannot tell you how touched and moved I am that Senator Warner has
joined Senator Lieberman. It is a wonderful moment in history. This, I
believe.
We would never leave a child alone in a hot, locked car, and I
believe the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will not
leave this issue of global warming burning for another generation to
address. It is our responsibility, and we must act.
Today, with the introduction of this bill, we are taking the first
immensely important legislative step to meet the challenge of global
warming with hope and not with fear and with approaches that are
carefully thought out and some already successfully tried out, like a
cap-and-trade system that has been so successful in addressing acid
rain. Also in this bill, which I am very proud of, is a section on
energy efficiency, which has been so effective in lowering per capita
energy use, costs, and greenhouse gas emissions in my own home State of
California.
For the past 50 years, the United States of America has been the
world leader in environmental protection. Laws such as the Clean Water
Act, Clean Air Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Endangered Species Act,
and the Superfund Act have achieved so much for our Nation and so much
for our people. They have cleaned up our rivers and lakes, improved the
quality of our air, and protected our drinking water supplies. Each of
those laws--if you go back and study them--became a reality because
Congress started on the path that, over time, would lead to enactment
of strong legislation. The same is true for what we face today in
global warming. We must start on the path to pass strong legislation.
I have been working very closely with Senators Warner and Lieberman
as they have assembled their bill, as have many other colleagues. I
praise my friends for including so many people, including the occupant
of the chair, Senator Casey, who was quite involved in crafting the
green jobs portion of the bill. I have been so impressed with the
effort they have invested, seeking out the views not only of other
Senators but outside groups and business leaders, environmentalists,
everybody, pro and con, with whom they have met. They have put great
work into this effort. I am proud of that.
In my own conversations with them, I have laid out some important
principles that I believe must be reflected in legislation to address
this challenge.
First, the most important thing is that any bill has to include real,
mandatory cuts in global warming pollution. Any bill we pass must set
the Nation on the path to achieving the emissions reductions that will
avoid dangerous climate change. Under the Lieberman-Warner bill, we
anticipate reaching 1990 emissions levels by 2020. This will send a
strong early signal to the marketplace, which is a very important part
of getting where we need to go.
The second necessary element is the flexibility to respond to new
information because all of us know that daily we face new reports, new
scientists telling us new things we didn't know before. So I ask my
colleagues if they would include what I call a look-back provision in
the bill. The bill must include provisions for continuing to review the
science. We want to have our work based on science, and it has to
happen at regular intervals. We have to know whether we are doing
enough, too much, or if we have to do even more.
Third, we must establish a cap-and-trade program for global warming
pollution like the one that worked so well
[[Page S13081]]
in curbing acid rain. A cap-and-trade system will put a market price on
carbon, driving greater efficiency and new technology, while reducing
greenhouse gas emissions.
Fourth, we must protect the pioneering State efforts that are already
underway. The States have been leading the way on this issue and doing
it in the most bipartisan fashion. In my own State of California, we
have seen trailblazing there with a Republican Governor and a
Democratic legislature. I believe my State has the gold standard bill.
A total of 29 States have completed comprehensive climate action plans,
and many have set mandatory reduction targets. We don't want to
interfere with their work.
Fifth, it is a moral imperative to do what we can to ease the impacts
of global warming--not only on the American consumer but on world
populations suffering from drought, floods, and famine. The religious
community has worked very closely with all of us on this moral
imperative.
Finally, a bill must take into account the actions of countries that
are not making progress toward a clean, sustainable energy future and
must help level the playing field. Countries that want to export goods
into the United States must take steps consistent with our global
warming policy or be accountable for their emissions.
All of these elements I have mentioned are included in the Lieberman-
Warner bill. Some of us may want to make them stronger, and some of us
may want to make them weaker. But here is the important point: We have
the framework. Every single issue anyone could raise about global
warming has been raised and addressed in this bill, giving us a perfect
place to start.
I thank all of my colleagues who have introduced bills to deal with
global warming. Each bill has made an important contribution to the
debate, and I know each bill has helped Senators Warner and Lieberman
craft an excellent piece of legislation. We have this framework. We can
build on it; it embodies all of the key concepts. The bipartisan
progress on the bill is a reflection of how far we have come and brings
us that much closer to the day we will have comprehensive legislation
to deal with this great challenge of our generation.
It is with great pride that I yield the floor to Senator Joe
Lieberman.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished chair of our
Environment Committee. I thank her for her very kind and informed
remarks, but, more broadly, I thank her for the steadfast encouragement
she has given to Senator Warner and me and for her principled,
passionate, and very effective leadership. She understands that global
warming is real and wants to use the chairmanship she has now to see
that we, together, fashion a solution to this very real problem. I
thank her.
I hope and believe myself that she is right--that we will look back
on this day, as we stand here together across party lines to introduce
this legislation, as the beginning of something very significant that
finally happened. I have said before, and I will say it again, at this
moment, I feel as if we had been in a race between tipping points. The
challenge would be that we get to the political tipping point where we
could come together and do something about global warming before we
reach the environmental tipping point, after which it would be harder
to avoid the worst consequences of global warming.
I think today we have begun to reach that political tipping point,
and there is no one who is more responsible for that than the senior
Senator from Virginia, my dear friend, John Warner. His partnership
with me on this and his commitment to get this done have made all the
difference.
I am pleased to stand with my friend from Virginia to announce today
the introduction of the America's Climate Security Act. I am proud to
also say that we have five original cosponsors--Senators Cardin,
Coleman, Collins, Dole, and Harkin. The doors are wide open for
additional cosponsors as this day and the days after go on.
This day comes after several months of work with Senator Warner, with
our staffs, with stakeholders, environmentalists, business community
people, and numerous hearings before the Environment and Public Works
Committee.
This legislation, S. 2191, America's Climate Security Act, is the
result of all that work. It is a pleasure now to yield to the
aforementioned great Senator from Virginia, John Warner.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The senior Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I first thank our distinguished chairwoman
from California. From the very moment she seized the reins of the
chairmanship of this committee, she indicated a strong desire to
address this problem.
I thank my colleague from Connecticut. He is the chairman of the
subcommittee with primary jurisdiction over this matter. I purposely
chose, as the longest serving member on the Environment and Public
Works Committee on the Republican side, to be ranking for the purpose
of this day coming to the floor of the Senate and indicating to our
colleagues that we had formulated a starting point for the Congress to
assume its leadership which I believe, as a coequal branch of our
Government, we have.
I am proud of the achievements we have made to date. I shall address
them further, but at this time, I yield the floor to our distinguished
colleague, Senator Inhofe, the ranking member of the full committee,
and thank him. While we differ on the substance of these matters
procedurally and we work our will in the subcommittee and eventually
the full committee, I do hope we can have his cooperation.
Mr. President, at this time, I ask that the hour for this debate be
extended from 10:30 a.m. to 10 minutes to 11 to accommodate Senator
Inhofe, who now will give his remarks, and then Senator Collins and
Senator Alexander.
Once again, I thank my distinguished chairman and ranking member. We
are off, we are out of the starting gate.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The
Senator from Oklahoma.
Mr. INHOFE. First of all, Mr. President, I had to come down here.
Quite frankly, I didn't find out until last night--actually, until this
morning, really--any of the parameters of this bill. My good friend
from Connecticut just said they have been working on it for months and
months, and yet nobody knows what it is. So only this morning I
received some information.
I see it is very similar to the McCain-Lieberman bill that passed. I
remember we stood here and debated that bill for 5 days, I guess it
was, a couple of years ago. I hope--and with the chairman of the
Environment and Public Works Committee here--that we are going to have
hearings on this legislation and spend some time, get into it because
we do not get into something this big without hearing very significant
issues.
I will give a couple examples. First, let me ask a question. How much
time do I have, I ask my friend from Virginia?
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, my understanding is the Senator wants 5 or
6 minutes.
Mr. INHOFE. I will go ahead. That is fine. I will initially mention a
couple of points that are of concern to me.
First, this has been something my colleagues have worked on for a
long period of time. I understand that is true because I have heard my
friend from Virginia tell that to me and others on the committee. But
we really didn't find out what it is.
I am reading something that came out of the Congressional Quarterly
this morning. One sentence:
Emissions caps would start at the 2005 level in 2012 and
decrease annually, reaching the 1990 levels in 2020 and 65
percent below 1990 levels in 2050.
I assume that is an accurate description.
Mrs. BOXER. Yes.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, the Senator from Oklahoma is correct.
Mr. INHOFE. As I recall, the other bill we had 2 years ago was that
emissions caps would start at the 2004 level by 2012, and there was no
intermediate step at that time. So it went down to one-third below the
baseline by 2050. That is my understanding. I think that is accurate.
So there is not that much difference. If anything, it is lower because
this is one-third below the baseline, and this one is 65 percent below.
It would be even more of a cut by 2050.
[[Page S13082]]
The reason I bring up this point is because these issues don't happen
in a vacuum. These are issues that are very costly. The term ``tipping
point'' was used recently. I agree there is a tipping point, and I am
going to be reserving more than 2 hours in the next few days on the
floor, and I don't want my good friends to endure the whole 2 hours but
at least give consideration to what is happening right now, and it is
unbelievable.
I have never seen such a change in science as we have witnessed in
the last 5 months. The entire speech I am going to give is talking
about what has happened in the last 5 months. Let me give an example.
In August alone, the University of Washington claims to be ``the
first to document a statistically significant globally coherent
temperature response to the solar cycle.'' They came out and said it is
due to natural causes. They were on the other side of this issue
before.
A Belgium weather institute, August 27--all of this is in August of
this year, 2 months ago--natural causes.
A peer-reviewed study published in ``Geophysical Research Letters''
finds natural causes.
Here is a significant one now because over and over, I say to my good
friend from California, we have heard that 1998 was the hottest year.
Now NASA has come along and said, no, it was 1934. Interestingly
enough, 1934 precipitated the largest increase in CO2 going
into the atmosphere. After 1940, there was an 80-percent increase going
into the atmosphere.
But here is the one, if my colleagues are not listening to anything
else, and I have a feeling they are not, I say to my friend from
California.
Mrs. BOXER. Yes, I am with you.
Mr. INHOFE. Listen to one point. I appreciate it. In the same month,
August, they peer-reviewed scientific literature, all of the literature
from 2004 to 2007. In this report--this is 539 papers. These were the
same ones used before as an example of what is going on. This is what
they are going to review. It has not been released yet. It was done in
August:
Less than half of all published scientists endorse the
global warming theory.
Less than half. Then it says:
Of 539 total papers of climate change, only 38--
That is 7 percent ``gave an explicit endorsement'' that man is the
major cause of climate change. That is huge. That wasn't here until
August of this year.
I only bring these points out to say that anyone who says the science
is settled to at least give me their attention for 2 hours. I will be
talking about these issues.
Here is what the American people need to know. I don't know what the
cost of this would be if we were to pass the Warner-Lieberman bill. I
have no way of knowing because I didn't see it until this morning. No
one has made an evaluation. If we go back to the old Kyoto reductions,
the Wharton Economic Survey said it would cost the average family of
four in America $2,700 a year. Then when MIT came out addressing the
two bills--the Boxer bill that is not yet introduced--it would cost the
energy system, it would increase the cost of energy an amount equal to
$4,500 for a family of four, and this bill apparently, or at least the
old McCain-Lieberman bill, which this is very similar to but a little
bit more aggressive in the later years, it would be $3,500 per family
of four.
I remember coming down to this floor, I say to my good friend from
Tennessee, back in 1993 during the largest tax increase in the last few
years prior to that. It was called the Clinton-Gore tax increase. It
was an increase that was equal to about $300 per family of four. Here
we are talking about something that will be 10 times the largest tax
increase in the last three decades.
This fact cannot be ignored if there is some question in terms of
science. They will say there is not, that it is settled. I am going to
be quoting facts that will shoot that down, and people should look at
it. We have to realize we have a lot of families in America, and we
have to consider what kind of a tax increase this will impose on them.
My hope is this--and I say this to the chairman of the Environment
and Public Works Committee who will be joining me in about 3 minutes in
a hearing--let's have some hearings on this legislation. Let's bring it
out. Let's really spend some time because this is very significant if
we are looking at something that is going to cost the average taxpayer
something like 10 times the largest tax increase we have experienced in
this country. I look forward to it.
Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I will take 1 minute. As I said to Senator
Lieberman, before Senator Inhofe and I go to a hearing we are having in
the Environment and Public Works Committee, I thank my colleagues for
participating in this conversation. Senator Inhofe is right. This is a
very important moment in time. The cost of doing nothing, according to
the leading economist on this topic in the world, Nicholas Stern, is
five times what the cost will be to address this issue now. So let's be
wise about what we do.
The second point is, I am looking forward to Senator Inhofe's 2 hours
on the Senate floor. I really am. Mr. President, I say to Senator
Inhofe, I am giving him a compliment.
I said, I am looking forward to hearing Senator Inhofe for 2 hours on
the Senate floor, and I hope he will stay for my 2 hours when he is
done. I will, in fact, do that because many of the points Senator
Inhofe makes--it is cherry-picking information.
I think it is very important that we have this debate. In many ways,
it is good we are chairman and ranking member--and the last time it was
the opposite--because I do think certainly the Senate gets the benefit
of the broad viewpoint on this subject of global warming.
I yield the time back to Senator Lieberman.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut.
Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank the chairman of the committee,
and I thank the Senator from Oklahoma. Obviously, we are going to have
a spirited debate on this subject.
What I want to say is the pleasure I have in having announced the
seven original cosponsors. As Senator Inhofe indicated, I had partnered
with Senator McCain on an earlier version of a climate change bill. We
brought it before the Senate twice. It failed twice.
To me, the most remarkable and specific fact today that gives me
encouragement is of the seven original cosponsors--that is, Senator
Warner and I and the five others who have just come forward without us
reaching out to them--four of those seven voted against one or both of
the iterations of the McCain-Lieberman bill. So this issue is moving in
the right direction. It is moving in the right direction because we
have answered in this bill some of the questions and concerns that
Senator Inhofe expressed about the economic consequences.
First, I wish to say America's Climate Security Act is for real. It
achieves necessary emissions by putting a cap on America's greenhouse
gas emissions over electric power, transportation, and manufacturing
sources that account for 75 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions
and by strengthening energy efficiency standards for appliances and
buildings.
I note the presence on the floor of our colleague from Tennessee,
Senator Alexander. I know this was of particular interest to him. He
made a significant contribution to this bill in that regard.
Now, what does this achieve? It does what we have to do. It doesn't
do everything everybody wants to do. I have already heard from some who
have said it doesn't go far enough. But let me set up this standard:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the group of more than
2,000 scientists from around the world who just shared the Nobel Prize
with our former colleague Al Gore, has said the goal should be to keep
the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere below 500 parts
per million, because that will avoid what they describe as the high
risk of severe global warming impacts here in the United States, which
obviously has to be our first concern, but also around the world.
I am pleased to say that if you take the Environmental Protection
Agency's analysis of the McCain-Lieberman bill and apply it to this
bill that Senator Warner and I are introducing, you will find the
concentration of greenhouse gases will be well below that danger level
of 500 parts per million by the end of the century.
[[Page S13083]]
Secondly, Senator Warner and I are as committed to promoting and
sustaining American prosperity as we are to protecting America's
environment and the global environment from the danger of climate
change. Senator Inhofe made an interesting point. This is different
from McCain-Lieberman, which had big jumps, or I should say big drops
in greenhouse gas emissions. We create a steady glidepath down, and
that is going to be easier for the sources of emissions to deal with.
Yes, we set a good solid goal in 2020 to make it clear that this is
real, a 20-percent reduction, bringing us back down to where the 1990
levels were. So it is real, but it moves slowly. And in this cap-and-
trade system, with the auctioning of credits and the opportunity to
subsidize some and provide free credits to other businesses while they
are in the transition, we are going to smooth the impact.
We have also created a mechanism--a carbon market efficiency board,
very creative--which comes out of work Senator Warner did with Senators
Graham, Landrieu, and Lincoln, a kind of Federal Reserve Board for
climate change cap and trade, which can step in during times of
economic stress to smooth this out so the American economy will
continue to grow. And, of course, the basic premise here--cap and
trade--is to set the standard: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Make
sure you are reducing them.
Others have said: Why don't we pass a carbon tax? Well, I suppose a
carbon tax would reduce carbon-emitting fossil fuels, but we don't know
that for sure. Look how the demand for gasoline has stayed up even as
the price has gone up. So you don't want to tax people without a
certainty of result. Mandatory cap and trade guarantees the result: We
want to protect our environment, our lives, our health, our wildlife,
and our beautiful natural places. It does it in a way that will drive
innovation and entrepreneurship. The market this bill creates will do
what we in this country have known that markets do best--they get the
job done and drive prices down.
I say finally that this legislation includes many provisions that
were drafted, suggested and, in fact, in some cases introduced by
colleagues in the Senate. This is an incomplete list, but I want to be
certain I mention Senators Collins and Alexander, who are on the floor,
Senator Coleman--and I will come back to him specifically--Senators
Boxer, Lautenberg, Sanders, McCain, Bingaman, Specter, Dole, Harkin,
Klobuchar, Carper, Lincoln, Casey, and Baucus.
Senator Coleman particularly has made a contribution to this
legislation that responds to a statement Senator Inhofe made. What is
the impact this is going to have on average working people in this
country--middle income, low income? We are concerned about that, and
Senator Coleman has essentially inserted a provision here that we
worked on with him that will ensure that low- and middle-income
Americans do not bear the brunt of paying for this program.
This bill is a synthesis of an enormous amount of work on the part of
many Members of the Senate. Senator Warner and I are deeply grateful
for their contributions. Let me say it specifically: We are introducing
the legislation today. Our subcommittee is going to have a hearing next
week. We are going to do the markup the week after that, the week of
October 29. This is an ongoing process.
Our doors, Senator Warner's door and mine, are open. We are putting
before the Senate today exactly what he said, a framework, a strong,
detailed, politically credible bill that has a real chance of passing,
but we are not claiming perfection here, and we welcome the opportunity
to work with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. This is not a
partisan issue and it certainly is not a partisan problem to fix it
before our children and grandchildren suffer from it.
Finally, before I yield back to Senator Warner, I again want to come
back to him. John Warner and I have worked together on many matters,
mostly regarding America's national security, as I have served under
his leadership on the Armed Services Committee. His decision to come to
the leadership of this effort to stop the onward movement of climate
change has made all the difference. I can't say it any better. It is
the tipping point, as far as I am concerned, in this Chamber. I believe
he is doing it for the same reason that has motivated him in the other
work we have done in the Armed Services Committee. He feels America is
threatened by this environmental problem and he wants to be part of the
solution to it.
We all know our colleague is retiring, after enormous service to our
country, at the end of this session. I think that together we have the
opportunity, with his participation, for this to be, in a long life of
great service to America both in this Chamber and in service in the
military, one of the great acts of service and leadership that John
Warner has done for America. I thank him from the bottom of my heart as
a dear friend and a wonderful partner in this effort.
I also want to thank his extraordinarily tireless legislative
assistant, Chelsea Maxwell, who has worked so well with Dave McIntosh
and Joe Goffman on my staff. This is the day of a breakthrough, but it
is only a beginning. We have kind of crossed the 50-yard line here, I
think, my friend from Virginia, and we have some work to do before we
go into the end zone, but with your help, we are going to do it.
Mr. President, I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor back to my
friend from Virginia.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Nelson of Nebraska). The Senator from
Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, this wonderful organization, the Senate,
has strong friendships. That is the way we operate. It may not be
apparent. We tend to be a little contentious. Partisanship has always
been a part of the legislative process since its very inception, but we
do have mutual respect for one another in this Chamber across the
aisle.
I thank my dear colleague from Connecticut for his very heartfelt
remarks, and I assure him I return in full measure the compliments he
has bestowed upon me, such as I can bestow the same upon him.
Now, I am not as sure we are on the 50-yard line. I want to drop back
a little bit. I think we have caught the punt and we are beginning to
move down the field. This is going to be a very long and contentious,
as it should be, piece of legislation. But somehow, I have a measure of
confidence that the Senate, as a body, will eventually act on a bill
for climate change. I am also confident that bill, in its final
analysis, will have the basic goals we are outlining today.
I say to my good friend from Oklahoma, the distinguished ranking
member of the full committee, yes, we just finished the bill last
night, but that is often the way things go around here. I have been
absent a few days, but I am hopefully back now for an extended time to
get this bill underway in our committee. But we did sort of open our
doors for business, as the commercial world says, in August. That
brought forth a very important forthcoming from the widest possible
diversity of sources in the private sector, and not only the business
world but the educational world, the philanthropic world, and on it
goes. They came to accept our offer to work with us to try and fashion
this bill. So together with our colleagues and others, we have put this
together and we are launching it today.
I want to make certain that time is given to my other colleagues, so
I will give my remarks later, but I stress the work that has been done
by so many of our colleagues prior to this bill being introduced today:
the McCain-Lieberman bill, which my colleague from Connecticut has
mentioned; the Bingaman-Specter bill. Senator Lieberman and I have made
a point of personally going to the offices and visiting with each of
the principal cosponsors, I believe, of all of these various bills and
indicating to them our desire to take a portion of their work product
and weave it into this, the bill that is before the Senate as of today:
The Alexander powerplant bill, and Senator Alexander will soon be
addressing the Senate on that; the Landrieu-Graham-Lincoln-Warner cost
containment bill; the Kerry carbon capture and storage bill; the
Coleman CO2 pipeline bill; and the Klobuchar-Snowe registry
bill.
We readily acknowledge the ground that has been broken, the important
gains thus far of so many of our colleagues. But with due respect to
the
[[Page S13084]]
administration, the basic difference between the administration's
approach and our approach is we feel that voluntarism will not achieve
the goals, the leadership that America must simply take on this issue
to join the other nations of the world that have taken up leadership.
The only way we feel to do this is by law.
Essentially, we are asking the infrastructure in America--the
industrial infrastructure, the transportation infrastructure, the power
infrastructure--to consider very significant investments, calling upon
the investment community in America to bring forward the private sector
resources and begin to make those commitments now so we can attain the
goals in the future. And, quite frankly, we have recognized from the
beginning there will be a burden on the American taxpayers.
There will be a burden, in fact, on almost every single American, and
it will be financial in some respects. We do not anticipate exactly how
much it will be, but every time you fill up your car with gasoline,
some portion of that will go toward America's role to lead in global
climate change. The power industry, the transportation industry, they
will all have to make their respective contributions.
So I join my good friend from Connecticut in acknowledging the work
that has been done by our respective staffs, the staff of our chairman
and others, but this is like a great ship that has been launched today.
And as we say in the Navy, you launch them and then you finish
outfitting them. Now it is up to our colleagues to come forward with
their ideas. We approach it with an open mind. This body will
eventually shape the bill.
We will move it into subcommittee next week, do our markup, hopefully
report that out successfully, move on to full committee, and in this
calendar year finish a product by the Environment and Public Works
Committee such that next year our respective leaders can determine when
is the appropriate time for this measure to be brought to the floor.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the balance of the time
be equally divided between Senators Coleman, Collins, and Alexander, in
that order, and that they be given the opportunity, even though they
are not at this point in time sponsors, to address the body. So that I
believe the hour for this debate will continue from now until the hour
of 11 a.m.
I so make that unanimous consent request.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. WARNER. We did that in consultation with our respective leaders.
I ask the time equally be divided between these two Senators.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Each Senator will have 5 minutes.
Mr. WARNER. I yield the floor to Senator Coleman.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota is recognized.
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I thank my friend from Connecticut and
esteemed colleague from Virginia for their work on this critical issue
of climate change. We spend a lot of time in this debate talking about
large numbers: the number of species that could be lost, the millions
of metric tons of CO2, the billions of dollars at stake for
our economy if mitigated incorrectly. But it is smaller numbers I am
most concerned about--hundreds of dollars. That is what the annual
burden could be for a household making around $15,000 a year should we
attempt to transform our energy supply without holding struggling
families harmless. One elderly woman waiting at a bus stop in
Minneapolis-St. Paul, when it gets to be about minus 15, minus 20,
sometimes minus 25, who is on a fixed income, who can't find money for
her other needs if energy rates go up--this is the price paid if we do
not address climate change responsibly; the young daughter who hopes
her dad can keep his job mining taconite up on the Iron Range in
northern Minnesota. This is the family we must protect if China decides
it won't take responsibility for its emissions. It is the numbers our
neighbors count that raise the most critical issues in the climate
change debate, the little things that end up becoming the big things.
That is why, when I signed on to Senator Lieberman's Climate
Stewardship and Innovation Act several months ago, we came to the floor
together and signed our names to a sense-of-the-Senate resolution that
stated that any comprehensive, mandatory greenhouse gas emissions
reduction program enacted by Congress must also take care of low-income
Americans, who will see their energy costs rise, prevent U.S. workers
from being undercut by foreign industries that produce goods in
countries without comparable greenhouse gas reduction programs, and
incentivize the production of clean energy technologies so that
Americans can create more green jobs at home while diversifying our
energy supply.
Senators Lieberman and Warner have listened to my concerns over the
last few months as they have worked to craft this legislation. This
bill is hard evidence that they took those concerns to heart and that
they too care about the small numbers that affect our fellow Americans
the most.
There are several provisions I am particularly proud of in America's
Climate Security Act, including provisions to provide an estimated $275
billion for low- and middle-income families to help hold them harmless
against increased energy costs, including additional funding for
critical programs such as LIHEAP and the Weatherization Assistance
Program--programs that the Senator from Maine, who is on the floor,
championed, because we know how important they are for those, the least
amongst us, who are impacted so greatly by energy costs.
This bill includes $30 billion through 2030 for job training for new
clean energy jobs that provide new employment opportunities in the new
green economy. It authorizes the President to require importers of
greenhouse-gas-intensive manufactured products credits if their home
countries have not taken comparable action. It incentivizes clean
energy technology by investing an estimated $400 billion through 2030
in zero and low carbon technologies, to accelerate our transition to a
clean energy future.
This bill does not just take care of the environment; it takes care
of our children. It is a major step forward in addressing global
climate change in a manner that brings the Senate together. This is, a
tremendous bipartisan coalition. Some folks were not on this side a
while ago, but understand the problem is real and the path we are
taking is a responsible path.
I am proud to cosponsor this bill. I thank both Senators for their
hard work and determination. They have proven they are committed to
action. I am proud to stand by their side.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today as a proud cosponsor of the
Lieberman-Warner America's Climate Security Act. This bill will address
the most significant environmental challenge facing our country and I
want to add my praise to that already heard of the two leaders, Senator
Lieberman and Senator Warner. I am convinced this bill does represent a
tipping point because of the coalition brought together to advance this
bill.
The scientific evidence clearly demonstrates the human contribution
to climate change. According to recent reports from the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, increases in greenhouse gas
emissions have already increased global temperatures and likely
contributed to more extreme weather events such as drought and floods.
These emissions will continue to change the climate, causing warming in
most regions of the world, and likely causing more droughts, floods,
and other societal problems.
In the United States alone, emissions of the primary greenhouse gas,
carbon dioxide, have risen more than 20 percent since 1990. Climate
change is one of the most daunting challenges we face, and we must
develop reasonable solutions to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions.
That is why I am truly excited about this coalition. Senator
Lieberman deserves much praise for his longstanding leadership, for
working with Members on both sides of the aisle. Senator Warner's
commitment to taking on this cause gives me much hope that for the
first time we are actually going to get a bill through that is going to
make a difference.
This bipartisan bill presents a practical, economically sound
approach to
[[Page S13085]]
reducing America's greenhouse gas emissions by 70 percent over 2005
levels by the year 2050.
I also thank Senator Coleman for his contributions to this bill, for
making sure that we looked at the economic impact, particularly on low-
income families.
I have observed in person the dramatic effects of climate change. I
have had the opportunity to be briefed by the most preeminent experts
in this field.
On a trip to Antarctica and New Zealand, for example, I learned more
about the groundbreaking research done by scientists from the
University of Maine. One of those professors, a distinguished National
Academy of Sciences member, George Denton, toured parts of sites in New
Zealand with us. He showed us sites that had been buried by massive
glaciers at the beginning of the 20th century but are now ice free.
Fifty percent of the glaciers in New Zealand have melted since 1860--an
event unprecedented in the last 5,000 years.
The melting is even more dramatic in the northern hemisphere. In the
last 30 years, the Arctic has lost sea ice covering an area 10 times as
large as the State of Maine. At this rate that area is going to be ice
free by the year 2050.
In Barrow, AK, I witnessed the impact of the melting permafrost. I
saw telephone poles that had been planted decades ago in the permafrost
that are now leaning over. I talked to native people who told me they
were seeing insects that they have never seen that far north; that
there has been an extraordinary change in the pattern of fish spawning
in the area.
These are dramatic changes. The time has come to take meaningful
action to respond to climate change--not only talk about it but to pass
legislation. My colleagues have worked so hard to develop this
legislation that will preserve our environment for future generations
while providing reasonable, achievable emission reduction goals,
offsets, and incentives for the industries covered by this bill.
The America's Climate Security Act covers U.S. electric power,
transportation, and manufacturing sources that together account for 75
percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. It requires these sectors to
reduce their emissions to 70 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. I am
pleased that the bill also strengthens energy efficiency standards for
appliances and buildings, and sets aside credits and funding to deploy
advanced technologies for reducing emissions and helps protect low- and
middle-income Americans from higher energy costs.
Let me conclude my remarks by again applauding the leadership and the
hard work of my colleagues from Connecticut and Virginia. I urge all of
our colleagues to consider joining us on this important legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the senior Senator
from Tennessee is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I congratulate the Senators from
Connecticut and Virginia for their leadership. Their presence in front
of this bill makes a huge difference in this Chamber. I congratulate
Senator Collins, Senator Coleman, Senator Dole, and the other
cosponsors.
The question before the Senate is not whether to act on climate
change, or when to act on climate change, but how to act on climate
change. How shall we, in this Congress, begin to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions with the most certainty, least complexity, and the lowest
cost? The Lieberman-Warner legislation prefers an economy-wide cap-and-
trade approach. I prefer a sector-by-sector approach, that is, devising
the lowest cost, least complex approach tailored to each of the three
largest sectors of the economy that produce the most greenhouse gases.
Since my first year in the Senate in 2003, first with Senator Carper
and then with Senator Lieberman, I have introduced legislation to put a
cap on carbon emissions from the first of these three large sectors,
electricity powerplants. These plants produce 40 percent of the carbon
dioxide and 33 percent of the greenhouse gases in the United States. I
will now broaden my legislation to include two other major sectors of
the economy, one, a low carbon fuel standard for the fuels used in
transportation--transportation produces another one-third of America's
greenhouse gases--and, third, an aggressive approach to building energy
efficiency. I am grateful to the sponsors for including energy
efficiency in their legislation.
Tailoring our approach to only these three sectors--powerplants,
transportation, and buildings--would cover about two-thirds of all U.S.
greenhouse gas emissions. I believe I heard Senator Lieberman say the
Lieberman-Warner bill would approach 75 percent of the greenhouse gas
emissions.
As we implement laws reducing emissions from these three large
sectors, we could learn more and move on to the other sectors in the
future. A sector-by-sector approach minimizes guesswork. For example,
the United States has 16 years experience with a cap-and-trade program
designed to reduce acid rain pollution from powerplants. The program
costs less than expected. Utilities have experience with how it works,
and we have in place right now the mechanisms we need to measure and
regulate carbon from utility smokestacks. Cap and trade, which the
Lieberman-Warner bill employs, and which my legislation employs for the
utility sector, is a Republican idea, advanced by the first Bush
administration in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. With cap and
trade, the Government sets the limits and the deadlines, and the market
sets the price. With a carbon tax, on the other hand, the congressional
tax committees and the Internal Revenue Service set the price.
Cap and trade creates a more certain environment than a tax. Congress
would have to revisit the carbon question to determine whether the tax
is high enough to achieve the environmental goal, which could result in
constantly changing limits and taxes. With a carbon tax there is more
possibility that the cost of the tax will simply be passed along to the
consumer.
A sector-by-sector approach of the kind I advocate allows us to build
on steps already taken. For example, in the transportation sector,
Congress has already begun to mandate renewable fuels to reduce
greenhouse gasses.
This year the Senate enlarged that mandate and adopted fuel
efficiency standards for cars and trucks. I believe we should add to
those steps a low-carbon fuel standard; that is, requiring
transportation fuels to decrease gradually the amount of carbon in the
gasoline they contain, which is a logical and manageable next step.
In addition, both in the Energy bill of 2005 and the Energy bill the
Senate passed earlier this year, Congress began to encourage more
efficient buildings. Making those steps more aggressive holds the
promise for enormous carbon savings at the least cost.
I believe a sector-by-sector approach will do the least harm. It
avoids imposing new regulations directly on the manufacturing sector,
who nevertheless may have higher costs for fuel and electricity, and
therefore avoids adding to the pressure to ship jobs overseas.
By minimizing guesswork, my approach avoids grand plans that sound
good but may turn out to invoke the high law of unintended
consequences. I also believe a sector-by-sector approach is the easiest
approach.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Brown). The Senator's time has expired.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for 1
additional minute.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I believe it is the easiest approach
for Members of Congress to understand and explain to our constituents
these very complicated issues. As the recent debate on comprehensive
immigration should have taught us, this is not an insignificant
concern.
The Lieberman-Warner economy-wide climate change legislation is an
important contribution. I will not be a cosponsor as this point because
I prefer sector by sector, but I will be a full participant in the
committee and the Senate to produce a sensible piece of legislation in
this Congress.
The question before the Senate is not whether to act on climate
change or when to act, it is how to act. And we should act in this
session.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.
Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I wish to thank my colleagues, Senators
Coleman, Collins, and Alexander. Each of you made a contribution.
[[Page S13086]]
I thank the leadership of the Senate who made available this very
important hour for our bill to be laid down. Now the work begins.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise to speak about legislation which was
introduced this morning, America's Climate Security Act. I congratulate
and commend a number of our colleagues but especially Senators
Lieberman and Warner for their work on this important legislation that
slows, stops, and reverses global warming. I also thank Senator Boxer
for her continued leadership and unwavering commitment to bringing
global warming legislation to the Senate.
There are going to be people in this Chamber and other places who
will find fault with this bill, I am sure. Some will say it goes too
far. Some will say it doesn't go far enough. But the most important
thing is that this legislation, America's Climate Security Act, is a
bipartisan bill. I believe we must have a full and robust debate on
global warming, and we need to do it now. That is why this bill is so
important. This legislation is both thoughtful and comprehensive. It is
what we need to bring global warming to the forefront in American
policy.
I personally thank Senators Lieberman and Warner for their
willingness to work with me on issues critically important to working
families in Pennsylvania and America. I come from a State with a lot of
coal and a lot of manufacturing. I believe the future of Pennsylvania
and the people living there is closely linked to the future of both of
these industries: manufacturing overall and coal itself. I believe we
have a moral obligation to end our contribution to global warming, but
I am also optimistic that we can do this in a way that protects workers
and creates manufacturing jobs. Senator Warner and Senator Lieberman
understand how important this is to bring our workforce with us into
the new jobs created by greenhouse gas reduction and the programs that
support that. Both Senators have agreed and have graciously offered to
work with me to refine a placeholder provision currently in their bill
that we call the climate change worker assistance program which we
worked together to draft. I look forward to my continued work with them
on this program and their legislation. I am proud to say I am an
original cosponsor.
Finally, I thank Chelsea Maxwell from Senator Warner's staff and
David McIntosh from Senator Lieberman's staff for their work with my
staff, especially Kasey Gillette of my staff, who worked so hard to
make this possible.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. SANDERS. I also want to say a few words on climate change and the
issue of global warming. Let me begin by quoting from an op-ed that
appeared in the Burlington Free Press, my hometown newspaper, on
October 7, by Bill McKibben, well known as one of the most savvy and
best known environmental writers in the world. He happens to teach at
Middlebury College. He said:
It's not Democrats negotiating with Republicans or
environmentalists negotiating with business interests. It's
human beings negotiating with chemistry and physics, and
chemistry and physics don't really do much in the way of
bargaining. Science has told us what we need to do: cut
carbon emissions quickly in the next few years, and keep that
pressure on til we've trimmed our emissions at least 80
percent by midcentury. No loopholes for vested interests, no
hard-to-quantify offset schemes, no giveaways to the
utilities. Just a commitment to stop vetoing the laws of
nature. That commitment has got to come soon . . .
The point that Bill McKibben and many other scientists and
environmentalists have made is, we are up against very serious laws of
physics. That is what we are dealing with. It is not what I say or what
anybody else says. It is whether we are going to get a handle on global
warming. Because if we don't, this planet is going to suffer severe and
irreparable damage.
I begin my remarks by thanking Senator Lieberman and Senator Warner
for their hard work in putting together America's Climate Security Act.
As a member of that same subcommittee, I look forward to playing an
active role in strengthening that legislation. I look forward to
working with them on this issue.
I also take this opportunity to thank the 18 cosponsors of the
legislation Senator Boxer and I introduced in January of this year, S.
309. Those are Senators Akaka, Biden, Cardin, Casey, Clinton, Dodd,
Durbin, Feingold, Inouye, Kennedy, Klobuchar, Lautenberg, Leahy,
Menendez, Mikulski, Obama, Reed, and Whitehouse.
This legislation, S. 309, tackles global warming as best we could
based on the science. To be more specific, this bill is based on the
desire to limit the global increase in temperature to no more than 2
degrees Celsius, and to meet this goal science tells us we must
stabilize global CO2 concentrations at no higher a level
than 450 parts per million. This level only provides us, the scientists
say, with a 50/50 chance of keeping the worst from happening. These
odds are not great. It is a gamble. If we were cautious and
conservative about these things, we would err on the side of safety and
keep the pollution down lower than this level in order to protect the
one and only world that we have.
I thank all of the cosponsors of the legislation that Senator Boxer
and I introduced for standing with science. We should also be clear
about one other thing. This is a very important point. What the
scientists are now telling us is, in terms of their projections, in
terms of their analyses, they have been too conservative. What they are
now telling us is the problem of global warming and the rapidity of the
global warming changes is more severe than they had previously
anticipated. In other words, we have to be even more aggressive, not
less aggressive, in addressing this major planetary crisis.
It may well be that the legislation Senator Boxer and I introduced is
too conservative, but it is for sure that we should be going forward
and not backward.
Let me take this opportunity to quote from some of the major
environmental organizations in terms of what they are saying about the
legislation introduced today by Senators Lieberman and Warner. I think
it is best that I read from them rather than giving my views at this
particular point.
This is what the U.S. Public Interest Research Group says:
We applaud Senators Lieberman and Warner for their
leadership on global warming. Time is running out to stop the
worst effects of global warming, and this bill is an
important starting point for action.
U.S. PIRG then goes on to say:
To rise to the challenge of global warming, this new bill
must be strengthened. Three changes are essential:
(1) The bill must achieve faster and deeper cuts in
pollution, which is what the science demands. The pollution
caps in the bill aim to reduce total U.S. global warming
emissions by about 11 percent by 2020 and by just over 50
percent by 2050.
Additional, modest reductions may be achieved through other
policies in the bill, but those reductions are difficult to
quantify and are not guaranteed. According to the current
science, the United States must reduce its total global
warming emissions by at least 15% by 2020 and by at least 80%
by 2050. In addition, periodic reviews of the bill's
scientific adequacy must trigger additional pollution-
reduction requirements.
(2) Flexibility mechanisms in the bill must be tightened to
prevent undermining the goals of the bill. The bill currently
allows companies to exceed their pollution limits by paying
sources not covered by the program to reduce emissions.
Ensuring that a ton of pollution from such ``offsets'' equals
a ton of real reductions is a major challenge. In addition,
offsets delay the transition to cleaner technology that will
be needed to achieve deep future cuts in emissions. Under the
bill, a company could theoretically meet its entire 2020
pollution-reduction requirement through offsets. The number
of offset reductions allowed under the bill must be
significantly lowered.
(3) Polluters must be required to pay for every ton of
pollution they put into the atmosphere. The bill gives
hundreds of billions of dollars to polluters for free, which
will create windfall profits, such as has occurred in Europe,
and take vital resources away from easing America's
transition to a clean energy future. In the United Kingdom
alone, windfall profits from emission trading have been
estimated at nearly $2 billion. These profits come directly
from the pocketbooks of consumers. Under this bill, just
under half (49%) of the pollution permits would initially be
given to polluters for free, and it will take 25 years (until
2036) before we stop handing polluters free money.
That is what U.S. PIRG had to say.
Let me go to another group, an even better known environmental group,
and that is the Sierra Club. Let me tell you what they said today in
their press statement. I quote from the Sierra Club:
The bill is a significant political step forward for the
U.S. Congress, but unfortunately the legislation as
introduced still
[[Page S13087]]
falls short from what is demanded by the science and the
public to meet the challenge of global warming. This comes
even as U.S. states, cities, and counties move forward with
ambitious, science-based proposals to tackle the issue. We
look forward to working with Senators to seek the additional
improvements necessary for the bill to sufficiently address
the challenge before us.
I continue to quote from the Sierra Club:
At this crucial moment, we must continue to insist on a
global warming bill that is committed to scientific integrity
and economic fairness. In order to prevent the most
catastrophic effects of global warming, we must cut emissions
80 percent by 2050--an achievable annual reduction of about 2
percent. In order to get the market moving and bring
America's clean energy future to life, any bill must start
out strong by seeking a short-term reduction on the order of
20 percent of total emissions by 2020. Disturbances to the
climate have come more quickly and forcefully than even the
most pessimistic among us predicted. The Lieberman-Warner
bill, as introduced, leaves us in serious danger of reaching
the tipping points that scientists tell us could lead to
catastrophic changes to the climate.
Continuing to quote from the Sierra Club statement of today:
While the bill has moved in the right direction, it gives
too many free allowances to polluters for far too long--
enriching executives and shareholders instead of generating
the funds needed to help us meet our emissions goals and
ensure a smooth transition to the clean energy economy.
That is some of the statement from the Sierra Club.
Let me now quote from another organization, an organization of
physicians. It is called Physicians for Social Responsibility, a well-
known group. They have also issued a statement today. Let me quote from
the statement of the Physicians for Social Responsibility:
Physicians for Social Responsibility appreciates the
efforts of Senators Joe Lieberman and John Warner to craft
legislation to address global warming but calls on the Senate
Environment and Public Works Committee to make necessary
improvements before passing the bill.
It continues:
The reality of global warming is becoming more apparent
every day, and the science is clear as to what action we need
to take. In order to prevent this world-wide disaster, we
must stabilize atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse
gases. And, the U.S. must meet the challenge of starting now
and reaching a goal of 80 percent reductions below a 2000
baseline. Unfortunately, the bill drafted by Senators
Lieberman and Warner will not meet that goal.
Let me continue quoting from the Physicians for Social
Responsibility, who, of course, are physicians. This is what they say,
providing an interesting analogy:
Physicians for Social Responsibility's approach to this
[global warming] is similar to the manner in which a
physician treats a patient: what are the symptoms, what are
the causes and how do we treat the disease? We would not
prescribe half of the needed medication to a patient, and we
cannot support a bill that does not fully address the causes
of global warming. To protect human health and reverse global
warming, we need to begin aggressive treatment right away.
That is Physicians for Social Responsibility.
I could sit here and quote from many other press statements or talk
to my colleagues about the science, but I will not do that. This is
what I want to say: If we are concerned about the future of this
planet--I know every Member here is--and the lives and well-being of
our kids and our grandchildren, not only in this country but all over
the world, we are going to have to rise up to this issue.
It is not just a bargain here and a bargain there. Because you can
have all the bargaining you want, and all the nonpartisanship you want,
and yet this planet will face catastrophic damage unless we deal with
the reality of the science. It is not whether we are nice guys or bad
guys. This is what we are facing. We are facing science. What the
scientists are telling us is their projections were too conservative.
The problem is more severe than they had anticipated.
I note my friend and colleague, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, made a
very important point that others have made, which is, as we deal with
the issue of global warming, let us not forget about the workers who
are impacted, the consumers who are impacted. Certainly and absolutely
we must do that. One of the bright aspects, the positive aspects about
this whole discussion of global warming is if we get our act together--
if, for example, we begin the process of breaking our dependency on the
automobile and expand our rail system; if, in fact, we produce cars
that get the kind of mileage we know Detroit can produce--we can grow
jobs in the transportation area, not see them shrink.
If we begin to move intelligently toward energy efficiency, if we
retrofit our homes and our offices and our schools, we can create huge
numbers of good-paying jobs through the installation and the production
of the products we need to make this Nation much more energy efficient.
It is all sitting there waiting to happen. If we have the courage to
move away from fossil fuel, to move to solar energy, to move to wind,
to move to other forms of sustainable energy, we can create millions of
good-paying jobs.
I would mention to my colleagues that right now out on the Mall--I
was there last evening--there is a wonderful display of solar homes put
together by the Solar Decathlon. We have universities from all over the
United States of America, and from Europe as well, showing us what we
can do today in making energy-efficient homes and utilizing the
potential of solar energy. California is making progress. Germany is
making progress. We are not moving anywhere near the degree to where we
should be moving.
Think about the jobs we create when 10 million homes in America have
photovoltaic units on their rooftops. Think of the energy we produce
through solar plants in the South and the West and the Southwest of
this country. Think about what it means when we have small wind
turbines all over rural America. It is not only moving away from fossil
fuels, which are destroying the planet, not only moving to clean
energy, it is creating millions of good-paying jobs.
We know how to do this. We know how to do it. The technology is there
today. It will only get better. Our country has to start investing in
these technologies. We can create the jobs. We can reverse global
warming.
I conclude by saying this: I applaud Senator Lieberman and Senator
Warner. I hope we can work together. But I think we have a distance to
go to make that legislation better, stronger, more consistent with the
science that is out there. I look forward to working with all of my
colleagues to do that.
______
By Mr. FEINGOLD:
S. 2192. A bill to establish a user fee for follow-up reinspections
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.
Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that would
charge a reinspection fee for goods that fail FDA inspection for good
manufacturing practices. Currently, businesses do not have to pay for
the second inspection if they fail. Essentially, then, the FDA is
absorbing this extra cost. This Nation faces difficult enough choices
without subsidizing private companies that fail basic inspections. I am
pleased to credit the administration for identifying this proposed
savings of an estimated $23 million per year in its fiscal year 2008
budget. Over 5 years, this could save as much as $115 million.
We must ensure that U.S. taxpayer money is being used efficiently and
effectively, and this measure would help in our ongoing efforts to
streamline government programs and reduce the Federal budget deficit.
FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach testified about these fees
before the House Agriculture, Rural Development, and FDA Appropriations
Subcommittee in 2006. He believes, and I agree, that the reinspection
fee will motivate businesses to comply with long-established health and
safety standards. Businesses that do not meet federal standards should
bear the burden of the reinspection, rather than getting a free pass at
the taxpayer's expense.
One of the main reasons I first ran for the U.S. Senate was to
restore fiscal responsibility to the federal budget. I have worked
throughout my Senate career to eliminate wasteful spending and to
reduce the budget deficit. Unless we return to fiscally responsible
budgeting, Congress will saddle our Nation's younger generations with
an enormous financial burden for years to come. This bill is one small
step in that direction.
I ask unanimous consent the the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
[[Page S13088]]
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2192
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. ESTABLISHMENT OF USER FEE FOR FOLLOW-UP
REINSPECTIONS.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall assess and collect a
user fee from each manufacturer of a food, drug, device,
biological product, or animal drug for which a follow-up
reinspection is required to ensure correction of a violation,
found by the Secretary during initial inspection of the
manufacturer, of a Good Manufacturing Practices requirement
under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301
et seq.).
(b) Payment of Fee.--The user fee required by subsection
(a) shall be due from a manufacturer upon the reinspection of
the manufacturer as described in subsection (a).
(c) Amount of User Fee.--The amount of the user fee
required under subsection (a) shall be established by the
Secretary.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
(1) the terms ``animal drug'', ``device'', ``drug'', and
``food'' have the meanings given those terms in section 201
of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 321);
(2) the term ``biological product'' has the meaning given
the term in section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42
U.S.C. 262); and
(3) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Health
and Human Services.
______
By Mr. AKAKA (for himself and Mrs. Clinton):
S. 2197. A bill to establish the Federal Labor-Management Partnership
Council; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Federal
Labor-Management Partnership Act of 2007 to restore the labor-
management partnerships and council that were established by President
Clinton in 1993. I am pleased to be joined in this effort by
Representative Danny Davis, D-IL, who is introducing companion
legislation in the House, and Senator Hillary Clinton, who is
cosponsoring this bill.
On October 1, 1993, President Bill Clinton signed Executive Order
12871 establishing a National Partnership Council of Federal agency
representatives and labor organizations to advise the President on
matters involving labor-management relations. The Executive Order was
in response to long-standing labor-management conflicts and the need
for greater cooperation between labor and management in Government.
In the early 1990s the Government Accountability Office and others
identified labor-management partnerships as contributing to increased
productivity, better customer service, and higher employee
satisfaction. The Office of Personnel Management, OPM, concurred with
those findings in 2001. In a the letter to President Clinton
accompanying the report, then-OPM Director Janice Lachance said, ``The
evidence shows a real shift toward labor-management cooperation and
away from the adversarial approach so common in the past. I see a
strong, consistent desire on both sides of the table to continue on the
path toward collaborative labor-management relations and no interest in
returning to the old ways of doing business.''
Despite the success of the program, President Bush revoked the
Clinton Executive Order on February 17, 2001, less than one month after
taking office. Since that time, labor-management relations have
deteriorated throughout the Federal Government. The new personnel
systems at the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, which have
reduced collective bargaining rights for those employees, have lowered
employee morale and heightened the adversarial nature of labor-
management relations in the federal government. It has become clear
that participation in the decision making process through labor-
management partnerships often leads to greater employee understanding
and acceptance and a smoother transition to the new policy or program.
As the Clinton Executive Order said, ``Only by changing the nature of
federal labor-management relations so that managers, employees, and
employees' elected union representatives serve as partners will it be
possible to design and implement comprehensive changes necessary to
reform government.''
I urge my colleagues to join with me in encouraging labor-management
partnership and a cooperative solution to resolving Federal workplace
issues.
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. 2197
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 ``Federal Labor-Management
Partnership Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. FEDERAL LABOR-MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL.
(a) Establishment.--There is established a council to be
known as the Federal Labor-Management Partnership Council
(hereafter in this Act referred to as the ``Council''). The
Council shall be composed of--
(1) the Director of the Office of Personnel Management;
(2) the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of
Management and Budget;
(3) a deputy secretary (or other officer with agency-wide
authority) from each of 2 agencies not otherwise represented
on the Council, who shall be appointed by the President;
(4) the Chairman of the Federal Labor Relations Authority;
(5) the Director of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation
Service;
(6) 2 members who shall be appointed by the President to
represent the respective labor organizations representing (as
exclusive representatives) the first and second largest
numbers of Federal employees subject to chapter 71 of title
5, United States Code, or any other authority permitting such
employees to select an exclusive representative;
(7) 4 members who shall be appointed by the President to
represent labor organizations representing (as exclusive
representatives) substantial numbers of Federal employees
subject to chapter 71 of title 5, United States Code, or any
other authority permitting such employees to select an
exclusive representative--
(A) each of whom shall be selected giving due consideration
to such factors as the relative numbers of Federal employees
represented by the various organizations; and
(B) not more than 2 of whom may, at any time, be
representatives of the same labor organization or council,
federation, alliance, association, or affiliation of labor
organizations;
(8) 1 member who shall be appointed by the President to
represent the organization representing the largest number of
senior executives; and
(9) 1 member who shall be appointed by the President to
represent the organization representing the largest number of
Federal managers.
(b) Responsibilities and Functions.--The Council shall
advise the President on matters involving labor-management
relations in the executive branch. Its activities shall
include--
(1) supporting the creation of local labor-management
partnership councils that promote partnership efforts in the
executive branch;
(2) collecting and disseminating information about and
providing guidance on partnership efforts in the executive
branch, including the results of those efforts;
(3) using the expertise of individuals, both inside and
outside the Federal Government, to foster partnership
arrangements in the executive branch; and
(4) proposing statutory changes to improve the civil
service to better serve the public and carry out the mission
of the various agencies.
(c) Administration.--
(1) Chairperson.--The President shall designate a member of
the Council who is a full-time Federal employee to serve as
the Chairperson. The Council shall meet at the call of the
Chairperson or a majority of its members.
(2) Outside input.--The Council shall seek input from
agencies not represented on the Council, particularly smaller
agencies. It may also from time to time, in the discretion of
the Council, invite experts from the private and public
sectors to submit information. The Council shall also seek
input from companies, nonprofit organizations, State and
local governments, Federal employees, and customers of
Federal services, as needed.
(3) Assistance of the office of personnel management.--To
the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability
of appropriations, the Director of the Office of Personnel
Management shall, upon request, provide such staff,
facilities, support, and administrative services to the
Council as the Director considers appropriate.
(4) No compensation.--Members of the Council shall serve
without compensation for their work on the Council.
(5) Cooperation of other agencies.--All agencies shall, to
the extent permitted by law, provide to the Council such
assistance, information, and advice as the Council may
request.
(d) General Requirements.--
(1) Reporting to congress.--Any reporting to or appearances
before Congress that may be requested or required of the
Council shall be made by the Chairperson of the Council.
(2) Terms of membership.--A member under paragraph (3),
(6), (7), (8), or (9) of subsection (a) shall be appointed
for a term of 3 years, except that any individual chosen to
[[Page S13089]]
fill a vacancy under any of those paragraphs shall be
appointed for the unexpired term of the member replaced and
shall be chosen subject to the same conditions as applied
with respect to the original appointment.
(3) Service after expiration of term.--A member under
paragraph (3), (6), (7), (8), or (9) of subsection (a) may
serve after the expiration of such member's term until a
successor has taken office, but for not more than 60 days
after such term expires.
(4) Not special government employees.--A member who is not
otherwise a Federal employee shall not be considered a
special Government employee for any purpose.
SEC. 3. IMPLEMENTATION OF LABOR-MANAGEMENT PARTNERSHIPS
THROUGHOUT THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
The President shall direct the head of each agency which is
subject to chapter 71 of title 5, United States Code, or any
other authority permitting employees of such agency to select
an exclusive representative to take the following actions:
(1) Create labor-management partnerships by forming labor-
management committees or councils at appropriate levels, or
adapting existing committees or councils if such groups
exist.
(2) Involve employees and employee representatives as full
partners with management representatives to improve the civil
service to better serve the public and carry out the mission
of the agency.
(3) Provide systemic training of appropriate agency
employees (including line managers, first-line supervisors,
and labor organization representatives) in consensual methods
of dispute resolution, such as alternative dispute resolution
techniques and interest-based bargaining approaches.
(4) Negotiate, at the request of the labor organization, on
the subjects set forth in section 7106(b)(1) of title 5,
United States Code, and instruct subordinate officials to do
the same.
(5) Evaluate progress and improvements in organizational
performance resulting from such labor-management
partnerships.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
For purposes of this Act--
(1) the terms ``agency'' and ``labor organization'' have
the meanings set forth in section 7103(a) of title 5, United
States Code;
(2) the term ``Federal employee'' means an employee, as
defined by section 7103(a)(2) of title 5, United States Code;
(3) the term ``Federal manager'' means a management
official, as defined by section 7103(a)(11) of title 5,
United States Code; and
(4) the term ``senior executive'' has the meaning given
such term by section 3132(a)(3) of title 5, United States
Code.
______
By Mr. KERRY:
S. 2199. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide
for the treatment of certain foreign nonqualified deferred
compensation; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, today Representative Emanuel and I are
introducing the Offshore Deferred Compensation Reform Act of 2007 which
would put an end to the practice of allowing unlimited amounts of
income to be deferred offshore. Recently, it was brought to our
attention that U.S. hedge fund managers were deferring millions of
dollars of compensation offshore. Less generous deferrals have been
used by corporate executives for years.
Recent Internal Revenue Service data shows that the richest
Americans' share of national income has hit a postwar record. The
wealthiest one percent of Americans earned 21.2 percent of all income
in 2005. At a time when our personal savings rate has reached a 73-year
low and CEOs are paid 349 times as much as the average worker and the
top twenty-five hedge fund managers earned a total of $14 billion in
2006, we should not be providing a tax advantage to allow income to be
deferred offshore and invested on a tax-free basis. Low-income and
middle class families who are struggling are the ones who need tax
incentives to save for retirement.
Taxpayers can defer paying taxes immediately on their compensation,
either through ``qualified'' or ``nonqualified'' deferral arrangements.
Most taxpayers make qualified deferrals such as contributions to 401(k)
plans and individual retirement accounts, IRAs. Nonqualified deferred
compensation arrangements are usually used by senior executives or
other high-income taxpayers who want to defer amounts in the excess of
the qualified plan or IRA limits.
There are no limits on the amount on nonqualified deferred
compensation that can be deferred. Offshore nonqualified compensation
arrangements have the potential to be more abusive than similar
arrangements in the U.S.
U.S. companies that grant nonqualified deferred compensation to their
employees are unable to receive a tax deduction equal to the deferred
compensation until the compensation is paid to the employee. By
contrast, offshore employers can locate in no-tax jurisdictions,
provide deferred compensation to their U.S. employees, and suffer no
economic loss, since the timing of the deduction is not relevant when
the employer does not have any tax liability. Accordingly, there is a
preference in the Code for U.S. taxpayers to defer compensation in
certain offshore jurisdictions: it provides a significant tax benefit,
without any tax disincentive/disadvantage to their offshore employer.
There is a fundamental difference between middle class Americans who
can defer up to $15,500 of income into a 401(k) and $4,000 into their
IRAs and higher-income taxpayers who can defer unlimited amounts
offshore. The Offshore Deferred Compensation Reform Act of 2007 would
eliminate the ability of U.S. taxpayers to defer nonqualified deferred
compensation in offshore tax havens. Offshore nonqualified deferred
compensation paid by a foreign corporation will be taxable income when
there is no substantial risk of forfeiture to the compensation. A
substantial risk of forfeiture exists where the receipt of compensation
is conditioned upon the future performance of substantial services in
order to receive that compensation. Individuals who currently take
advantage of such tax planning and who wish to make deferrals would be
limited to making deferrals under qualified arrangements which are
subject to annual limitations.
The Offshore Deferred Compensation Reform Act of 2007 is not intended
to prohibit a foreign deferred compensation arrangement if the foreign
corporation entering into the arrangement is subject to tax on
substantially all of its income and denied an immediate deduction for
compensation that is deferred. For purposes of the legislation, a
foreign corporation would be any foreign corporation unless
substantially all of its income effectively connected to a trade or
business in the U.S. or is subject to an income tax imposed by a
foreign country that has a comprehensive tax treaty with the U.S., and
a deduction is allowed for compensation under rules that are
substantially similar to the way in which the U.S. provides deductions
for compensation. In addition, the Secretary of the Treasury is given
authority to determine whether a foreign corporation that operates in a
country without a formal tax treaty with the U.S. can qualify for the
exemption.
There are many different ways to structure an offshore deferral
arrangement. A prototypical structure would be an executive who elects
to defer his or her year-end bonus in an offshore investment fund for a
period of time, typically, 5 to 10 years. The bonus and any associated
earnings would not be taxable until the end of the term of the
arrangement, assuming it complies with the Code Section 409A
requirements. This legislation only affects compensation which is
earned, vested, and deferred after 2007.
The Offshore Deferred Compensation Act of 2007 only addresses
offshore nonqualified deferred compensation because these arrangements
have the potential to be more abusive than onshore arrangements. This
does meant that I believe that we should not continue to look at
limiting all nonqualified deferred compensation. I will continue to
work with the Finance Committee on this issue.
This legislation will put an end to offshore deferral arrangements
being used as unlimited IRAs. I look forward to working will my
colleagues to address this issue.
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. 2199
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 ``Offshore Deferred
Compensation Reform Act of 2007''.
SEC. 2. SPECIAL RULE FOR CERTAIN FOREIGN NONQUALIFIED
DEFERRED COMPENSATION.
(a) In General.--Subpart B of part II of subchapter E of
chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to
taxable year for which items of gross income included) is
amended by inserting after section 457 the following new
section:
[[Page S13090]]
``SEC. 457A. CERTAIN FOREIGN NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED
COMPENSATION.
``(a) In General.--Any compensation which is deferred under
a nonqualified deferred compensation plan (within the meaning
of section 409A(d)) of a nonqualified foreign corporation is
includible in gross income for purposes of this chapter when
there is no substantial risk of forfeiture of the rights to
such amount.
``(b) Nonqualified Foreign Corporation.--For purposes of
this section, the term `nonqualified foreign corporation'
means any foreign corporation unless substantially all of the
income of such corporation--
``(1) is effectively connected with the conduct of a trade
or business in the United States, or
``(2) is subject to an income tax imposed by a foreign
country, but only if--
``(A)(i) such corporation is eligible for benefits of a
comprehensive income tax treaty which such country has with
the United States which the Secretary determines is
satisfactory for purposes of this section and which includes
an exchange of information program, or
``(ii) the Secretary determines that such income tax is a
comprehensive income tax satisfactory for purposes of this
section, and
``(B) a deduction is allowed for compensation described in
subsection (a) under rules substantially similar to the rules
of this title.
``(c) Application of Certain Rules.--Rules similar to the
rules of paragraphs (4), (5), and (6) of section 409A(d)
shall apply for purposes of this section.
``(d) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such
regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out
the purposes of this section, including regulations
disregarding a substantial risk of forfeiture in cases where
necessary to carry out the purposes of this section.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections of subpart B
of part II of subchapter E of chapter 1 of such Code is
amended by inserting after the item relating to section 457
the following new item:
``Sec. 457A. Certain foreign nonqualified deferred compensation.''.
(c) Effective Date.--
(1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to amounts deferred in taxable years beginning after
December 31, 2007.
(2) Earnings.--The amendments made by this section shall
apply to earnings on deferred compensation only to the extent
that such amendments apply to such compensation.
______
By Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Tester):
S. 2200. A bill to authorize the use of Federal funds for flexible
financing of Indian tribal municipal, rural, and industrial water
system construction projects by certain federally recognized Indian
tribes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, there are still parts of this country
where having access to a clean, reliable water supply is not
guaranteed. Believe it or not, there are still places, many of which
are on Indian reservations, where individuals must haul their daily
water for drinking, cooking, and cleaning.
Over the years, Congress has authorized several municipal, rural and
industrial water supply projects for tribes; however, funding for those
projects has lagged significantly. This, coupled with construction
costs that are increasing on average about 10 percent a year, makes it
difficult for tribes to assemble cost-effective bid packages to get
these projects built in a reasonable time frame. As a result, many of
the projects have stalled or have yet to be built.
One mechanism to address this dilemma would be to allow tribes to
utilize flexible financing to construct these vital projects. Under
this option, tribes could issue tax exempt bonds or enter into other
loans to construct these projects now, and then utilize Federal
appropriations to pay financing costs over time. This concept has been
launched in the Indian Reservation Roads IRR, program, which has become
a model for financing tribal infrastructure projects. The Standing Rock
Sioux Tribe in my State was the leader in securing the initial
agreement in the IRR program. This agreement has allowed the tribe to
undertake a major road construction project and complete it in a few
short years. Without this flexibility, the project would have taken
upwards of 20 years and $27 million more to complete, according to the
tribe's analysis.
A Department of Interior administrative ruling issued on December 22,
2005, held that debt financing is an allowable use of Federal funds
under a tribe's self-determination agreement if the debt instrument is
used to pay for valid water construction costs. Unfortunately, this
ruling applied to only one tribe. The legislation I am introducing
today would affirm the ruling for all tribes, making them eligible for
reimbursement of such financing costs. This will provide tribes with
the necessary flexibility to get their projects built now as opposed to
having construction drag out for years, which will only increase the
costs to the Federal Government and delay the delivery of safe, clean
drinking water to many.
We have a trust obligation to meet the needs of Indian tribes.
Ensuring a safe, reliable water supply is part of this obligation. In
the 21st century, no home in this country should be without access to
quality water.
I am pleased that Senators Johnson and Tester are original
cosponsors, and I urge my colleagues to support this important
legislation.
______
By Mr. COLEMAN:
S. 2201. A bill to provide for the penalty-free use of retirement
funds for mortgage delinquency relief; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. COLEMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Home
Ownership Mortgage Emergency Act, HOME Act, my good friend Senator
Martinez.
This bill seeks to provide a measure of relief to those homeowners
who are having troubles meeting their mortgage payments and as a result
are facing the prospect of having their homes foreclosed.
As a former Mayor, I know the value and importance homeownership has
on our communities. Housing is after all one of the foundational assets
of our society. Policies encouraging homeownership is a good thing, not
just for our communities but also for first-time homebuyers who through
homeownership can be a part of the ownership society.
Over the years, we made great progress as the homeownership rate has
increased from 64 percent in 1994 to 69 percent in 2006. That is why I
am very troubled by the significant increase in the number of
foreclosures that have occurred already and the projections of worse to
come, as a record number of adjustable rate mortgages are due to reset
in the months ahead, putting an increasing number of homeowners at
serious risk of losing their homes. According to one estimate, $515
billion in adjustable rate mortgages are due to reset this year and
$680 billion next year.
To underscore the seriousness of the situation, Mr. President, just
consider these sobering figures. My State ranks 4th in the Nation in
terms of the percentage of subprime mortgages in foreclosures, and
currently 17 percent of subprime adjustable rate mortgages are past
due. More generally, the number of foreclosures has increased 183
percent in the last year. Nationally, foreclosures have almost doubled
in the last year, and more than 14.5 percent of subprime mortgages are
past due.
While there is no one single solution to the housing crisis, there
are a number of reasonable, measured efforts we can undertake that can
help folks stay in their homes in these difficult times. To that end, I
am introducing the HOME Act, which would allow low-to-middle income
homeowners penalty-free access to their retirement savings and allow
tax free distributions from their retirement savings so as long as the
withdrawals are paid back to the retirement accounts.
More specifically, my bill would allow homeowners who are 60 days
late in their mortgage payments to withdraw penalty-free up to $100,000
through 2009 to be used to refinance into an affordable mortgage or
avoid foreclosure. Except for very limited cases, a 10 percent penalty
is applied to early retirement distributions. As the tax code currently
waives this penalty for distributions from Individual Retirement
Accounts for first-time home purchases, I think it is only fair that we
waive this penalty for those who want to keep their homes.
Bottom-line, this bill is about helping homeowners help themselves.
While the 10 percent penalty is well-intentioned in that we want people
to avoid using their retirement savings during their working years,
times like these require us to recognize that sometimes such rules can
be counterproductive. Both on a homeowner level and on a community
level, I believe that it makes sense to enable those, who can, to keep
their homes. Ultimately it is up to the homeowner to
[[Page S13091]]
decide whether it makes financial sense to turn to their retirement
savings to keep their homes. At the very least however, for those who
do decide to do so, we should not penalize them for trying to keep a
roof over their heads and wanting to remain a part of the community
they have called home.
I urge my colleagues to support this measure as we seek to help out
homeowners in trouble.
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. 2201
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 ``Home Ownership Mortgage
Emergency Act'' or the ``HOME Act''.
SEC. 2. TAX-FAVORED WITHDRAWALS FROM RETIREMENT PLANS FOR
MORTGAGE DELINQUENCY RELIEF.
(a) In General.--Section 72(t) of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 shall not apply to any qualified mortgage delinquency
relief distribution.
(b) Aggregate Dollar Limitation.--
(1) In general.--For purposes of this section, the
aggregate amount of distributions received by an individual
which may be treated as qualified mortgage delinquency relief
distributions for any taxable year shall not exceed the
excess (if any) of--
(A) $100,000, over
(B) the aggregate amounts treated as qualified mortgage
delinquency relief distributions received by such individual
for all prior taxable years.
(2) Treatment of plan distributions.--If a distribution to
an individual would (without regard to paragraph (1)) be a
qualified mortgage delinquency relief distribution, a plan
shall not be treated as violating any requirement of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 merely because the plan treats
such distribution as a qualified mortgage delinquency relief
distribution, unless the aggregate amount of such
distributions from all plans maintained by the employer (and
any member of any controlled group which includes the
employer) to such individual exceeds $100,000.
(3) Controlled group.--For purposes of paragraph (2), the
term ``controlled group'' means any group treated as a single
employer under subsection (b), (c), (m), or (o) of section
414 of such Code.
(c) Amount Distributed May Be Repaid.--
(1) In general.--Any individual who receives a qualified
mortgage delinquency relief distribution may, at any time
during the 3-year period beginning on the day after the date
on which such distribution was received, make one or more
contributions in an aggregate amount not to exceed the amount
of such distribution to an eligible retirement plan of which
such individual is a beneficiary and to which a rollover
contribution of such distribution could be made under section
402(c), 403(a)(4), 403(b)(8), 408(d)(3), or 457(e)(16) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as the case may be.
(2) Treatment of repayments of distributions from eligible
retirement plans other than iras.--For purposes of such Code,
if a contribution is made pursuant to paragraph (1) with
respect to a qualified mortgage delinquency relief
distribution from an eligible retirement plan other than an
individual retirement plan, then the taxpayer shall, to the
extent of the amount of the contribution, be treated as
having received the qualified mortgage delinquency relief
distribution in an eligible rollover distribution (as defined
in section 402(c)(4) of such Code) and as having transferred
the amount to the eligible retirement plan in a direct
trustee to trustee transfer within 60 days of the
distribution.
(3) Treatment of repayments for distributions from iras.--
For purposes of such Code, if a contribution is made pursuant
to paragraph (1) with respect to a qualified mortgage
delinquency relief distribution from an individual retirement
plan (as defined by section 7701(a)(37) of such Code), then,
to the extent of the amount of the contribution, the
qualified mortgage delinquency relief distribution shall be
treated as a distribution described in section 408(d)(3) of
such Code and as having been transferred to the eligible
retirement plan in a direct trustee to trustee transfer
within 60 days of the distribution.
(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section--
(1) Qualified mortgage delinquency relief distribution.--
Except as provided in subsection (b), the term ``qualified
mortgage delinquency relief distribution'' means any
distribution from an eligible retirement plan made on or
after the date of the enactment of this Act and before
January 1, 2010, to an individual--
(A) whose acquisition indebtedness (as defined in section
163(h)(3)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, without
regard to clause (i) thereof) with respect to the principal
residence of the taxpayer is in delinquency for at least 60
days, and
(B) whose adjusted gross income (as defined in section 62
of the such Code) for the taxable year of such distribution
does not exceed $114,000 ($166,000 in the case of a joint
return under section 6013 of such Code).
(2) Eligible retirement plan.--The term ``eligible
retirement plan'' shall have the meaning given such term by
section 402(c)(8)(B) of such Code.
(3) Principal residence.--The term ``principal residence''
has the same meaning as when used in section 121 of such
Code.
(e) Income Inclusion Spread Over 3 Year Period for
Qualified Mortgage Delinquency Relief Distributions.--
(1) In general.--In the case of any qualified mortgage
delinquency relief distribution, unless the taxpayer elects
not to have this subsection apply for any taxable year, any
amount required to be included in gross income for such
taxable year shall be so included ratably over the 3-taxable
year period beginning with such taxable year.
(2) Special rule.--For purposes of paragraph (1), rules
similar to the rules of subparagraph (E) of section
408A(d)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall apply.
(f) Special Rules.--
(1) Exemption of distributions from trustee to trustee
transfer and withholding rules.--For purposes of sections
401(a)(31), 402(f), and 3405 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, qualified mortgage delinquency relief distributions
shall not be treated as eligible rollover distributions.
(2) Qualified mortgage delinquency relief distributions
treated as meeting plan distribution requirements.--For
purposes of such Code, a qualified mortgage delinquency
relief distribution shall be treated as meeting the
requirements of sections 401(k)(2)(B)(i), 403(b)(7)(A)(ii),
403(b)(11), and 457(d)(1)(A) of such Code.
(g) Provisions Relating to Plan Amendments.--
(1) In general.--If this subsection applies to any
amendment to any plan or annuity contract, such plan or
contract shall be treated as being operated in accordance
with the terms of the plan during the period described in
paragraph (2)(B)(i).
(2) Amendments to which subsection applies.--
(A) In general.--This subsection shall apply to any
amendment to any plan or annuity contract which is made--
(i) pursuant to any amendment made by this section, or
pursuant to any regulation issued by the Secretary of the
Treasury or the Secretary of Labor under this section, and
(ii) on or before the last day of the first plan year
beginning on or after January 1, 2010, or such later date as
the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe.
In the case of a governmental plan (as defined in section
414(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986), clause (ii)
shall be applied by substituting the date which is 2 years
after the date otherwise applied under clause (ii).
(B) Conditions.--This subsection shall not apply to any
amendment unless--
(i) during the period--
(I) beginning on the date the legislative or regulatory
amendment described in subparagraph (A)(i) takes effect (or
in the case of a plan or contract amendment not required by
such legislative or regulatory amendment, the effective date
specified by the plan), and
(II) ending on the date described in subparagraph (A)(ii)
(or, if earlier, the date the plan or contract amendment is
adopted),
the plan or contract is operated as if such plan or contract
amendment were in effect; and
(ii) such plan or contract amendment applies retroactively
for such period.
______
By Mr. WHITEHOUSE (for himself and Mrs. Boxer):
2204. A bill to assist wildlife populations and wildlife habitats in
adapting to and surviving the effects of global warming, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the very real
and serious issue of global climate change, and specifically our
efforts to help America's fish and wildlife, public lands, and oceans
adapt to and survive global warming.
I am aware that there remain some in this country, and even in this
chamber, who choose to reject the overwhelming scientific evidence that
global warming is occurring today, and will worsen severely if nothing
is done. For years, Congress and the Bush administration have delayed
the implementation of swift and aggressive measures to reduce our
greenhouse gas emissions. We can delay no longer. But as we work to
mitigate the causes of global warming, we must also take urgent action
to address its effects.
Climate change can have a devastating impact not only on the
environment, but on the living things that depend on it. The early
warning signs of climate change--taking place not just in the far
reaches of the Arctic but also right in our own backyards--have shown
that the world's wildlife is particularly vulnerable.
In Rhode Island's Narragansett Bay, the state's most distinctive
ecological feature, the gradually-warming water
[[Page S13092]]
temperature has contributed to a significant ecosystem shift. This
warming has already resulted in a documented increase in ocean
temperatures, leading to massive fish kills, like we experienced in
Greenwich Bay in the summer of 2003, and other ecological damage.
The changing environment in the Bay has had a broad and significant
impact on fish and shellfish. Cold water species, such as winter
flounder, that were once abundant in the Bay and had a high commercial
value have been replaced by warmer water species, such as scup, that
have a lower value. This has happened in just the past 20 years--a
frighteningly quick timeline and apparently not what Nature intended.
The shift in species has serious implications for Rhode Island's
fishermen, whose work has been part of our State's economy for
generations.
When I recently traveled to Greenland to witness firsthand the most
severe and visible effects of climate change, one of the most striking
of these was global warming's impact on Greenland's population of polar
bears. The Greenland ice cap is melting at a rate never before seen in
documented history. Melting sea ice and glaciers there and in other
parts of the Arctic are gradually raising sea levels around the world,
shrinking polar bears' habitats and bringing them into increasing
contact with humans. In some cases, we were told, villagers have been
forced to shoot polar bears with their cubs forced into populated areas
in search of food.
Global warming represents the single greatest threat to our natural
environment and wildlife, and we must act decisively if we are to avoid
disaster.
America's ocean and terrestrial wildlife is a fundamental part of our
national heritage, and conservation of our wildlife is a core value
shared by all Americans. Climate change is directly related to the
species decline we have experienced over the last two decades, both on
land and in our waters. The combined impact of climate change, loss of
habitat due to development pressures, and exploitation of our natural
resources threatens to drive many species over the brink to permanent
extinction.
Today, I am introducing legislation that will help bolster our oceans
and wildlife against one of the most significant of these pressures--
that of global climate change.
The Global Warming Wildlife Survival Act represents the first
comprehensive approach to mitigate the impact of climate change on
America's wildlife, oceans, and other natural systems. I am proud and
pleased to have the distinguished chair of the Environment and Public
Works Committee, Senator Boxer, join me as an original cosponsor of
this bill.
The bill has three primary goals: first, it will create a coordinated
national strategy, based on sound science, to guide Federal, State, and
local agency actions to address global warming's threat to our oceans
and wildlife. The Secretary of Interior will develop a national
strategy for managing terrestrial wildlife and the habitats they depend
on, and the Secretary of Commerce will develop a national strategy for
our oceans, coastal, and great lakes ecosystems. Both Secretaries will
consult with other affected federal agencies, States, tribes, local
governments, conservation organizations, and other stakeholders to
develop the strategy.
Second, the bill will support improved science capacity for Federal
agencies to respond to global warming, including the establishment of a
National Global Warming and Wildlife Science Center in the U.S.
Geological Survey for terrestrial wildlife and a comparable Science
Advisory Board within the Department of Commerce to provide scientific
and technical advice to respond to the impacts of global warming on
ocean and coastal ecosystems.
Finally, the bill directs that funding for implementation of the
national strategy be allocated in a balanced, strategic, and efficient
way to the Federal programs, States, and tribal agencies charged with
carrying out the national strategy.
The impact of climate change on our oceans and wildlife is an issue
too important to ignore. Human activity has caused climate change and
we must be responsible for solving it. We have an obligation to our
children and grandchildren to leave behind a natural environment as
good, and we would hope and pray better, than the one we inherited.
Preserving America's wildlife and oceans so that the next generation
can enjoy an unspoiled natural environment, and our many traditions of
hunting, fishing and other outdoor recreation, is a responsibility we
must uphold.
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. 2204
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Global
Warming Wildlife Survival Act''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents of this Act
is as follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Definitions.
TITLE I--NATURAL RESOURCES AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS
Sec. 101. Definitions.
Subtitle A--National Policy and Strategy for Wildlife
Sec. 111. National policy on wildlife and global warming.
Sec. 112. National strategy.
Sec. 113. Advisory Board; National Global Warming and
Wildlife Science Center.
Sec. 114. Authorization of appropriations.
Subtitle B--State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program
Sec. 121. State and tribal wildlife grants program.
TITLE II--OCEAN PROGRAMS
Sec. 201. Short title.
Sec. 202. Findings.
Subtitle A--National Policy for Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes
Ecosystem Health and Resiliency
Sec. 211. National policy on ocean, coastal, and great
lakes ecosystem health and resiliency.
Sec. 212. National ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes
resiliency strategy.
Sec. 213. Advisory Board.
Sec. 214. Implementation of national strategy.
Sec. 215. Reports.
Sec. 216. Authorization of appropriations.
Subtitle B--Planning for Climate Change in Coastal Zone
Sec. 221. Planning for climate change in coastal zone.
TITLE III--SPECIAL IMPERILED SPECIES PROGRAMS
Sec. 301. Definitions.
Sec. 302. Regional ecological symposia.
Sec. 303. National Academy of Sciences report.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Ecological processes.--
(A) In general.--The term ``ecological processes'' means
the biological, chemical, and physical interactions between
the biotic and abiotic components of an ecosystem.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``ecological processes''
includes--
(i) nutrient cycling;
(ii) pollination;
(iii) predator-prey relationships;
(iv) soil formation;
(v) gene flow;
(vi) hydrologic cycling;
(vii) decomposition; and
(viii) disturbance regimes, such as fire and flooding.
(2) Habitat.--
(A) In general.--The term ``habitat'' means the physical,
chemical, and biological properties that are used by wildlife
for growth, reproduction, and survival.
(B) Inclusions.--The term ``habitat'' includes aquatic and
terrestrial plant communities, food, water, cover, and space
on a tract of land, in a body of water, or in an area or
region.
(3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the
meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b).
(4) Wildlife.--The term ``wildlife'' means--
(A) any species of wild, free-ranging fauna, including fish
and other aquatic species; and
(B) any fauna in a captive breeding program the object of
which is to reintroduce individuals of a depleted indigenous
species into previously occupied range.
[[Page S13093]]
TITLE I--NATURAL RESOURCES AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS
SEC. 101. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Advisory board.--The term ``Advisory Board'' means the
Advisory Board established under section 113(a).
(2) Habitat linkage.--The term ``habitat linkage'' means an
area that--
(A) connects wildlife habitat or potential wildlife
habitat; and
(B) facilitates the ability of wildlife to move within a
landscape in response to the effects of global warming.
(3) National strategy.--The term ``national strategy''
means the national strategy established under section 112.
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of the Interior.
Subtitle A--National Policy and Strategy for Wildlife
SEC. 111. NATIONAL POLICY ON WILDLIFE AND GLOBAL WARMING.
It is the policy of the Federal Government, in cooperation
with State, tribal, and affected local governments, other
concerned public and private organizations, landowners, and
citizens to use all practicable means and measures--
(1) to assist wildlife populations and wildlife habitats in
adapting to and surviving the effects of global warming; and
(2) to ensure the persistence and resilience of the
wildlife of the United States, together with wildlife
habitat, as an essential part of the culture, landscape, and
natural resources of the United States.
SEC. 112. NATIONAL STRATEGY.
(a) Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall implement the
national policy under section 111 by establishing a national
strategy for assisting wildlife populations and wildlife
habitats in adapting to the impact of global warming.
(2) Administration.--In establishing the national strategy,
the Secretary shall--
(A) base the national strategy on the best available
science, as provided by the Advisory Board;
(B) develop the national strategy in cooperation with State
fish and wildlife agencies and Indian tribes;
(C) consult with--
(i) the Secretary of Agriculture;
(ii) the Secretary of Commerce;
(iii) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency;
(iv) local governments;
(v) conservation organizations;
(vi) scientists; and
(vii) other interested stakeholders; and
(D) provide public notice and opportunity for comment.
(b) Contents.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall include in the
national strategy prioritized goals and measures and a plan
for implementation (including a timeframe)--
(A) to identify and monitor wildlife populations, including
game species, that are likely to be adversely affected by
global warming, with particular emphasis on wildlife
populations with the greatest need for conservation;
(B) to identify and monitor coastal, marine, terrestrial,
and fresh water habitats that are at the greatest risk of
being damaged by global warming;
(C) assist species in adapting to the impact of global
warming;
(D) protect, acquire, and restore wildlife habitat to build
resilience to global warming;
(E) provide habitat linkages and corridors to facilitate
wildlife movements in response to global warming;
(F) restore and protect ecological processes that sustain
wildlife populations that are vulnerable to global warming;
and
(G) incorporate consideration of climate change in, and
integrate climate change adaptation strategies for wildlife
and wildlife habitat into, the planning and management of
Federal land administered by the Department of the Interior
and land administered by the Forest Service.
(2) Coordination with other plans.--In developing the
national strategy, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent
practicable--
(A) take into consideration research and information
contained in--
(i) State comprehensive wildlife conservation plans;
(ii) the North American Waterfowl Management Plan;
(iii) the National Fish Habitat Action Plan; and
(iv) other relevant plans; and
(B) coordinate and integrate, to the extent consistent with
the policy established under section 111, the goals and
measures identified in the national strategy with goals and
measures identified in those plans.
(c) Revisions.--Not later than 5 years after the date of
the initial establishment of the national strategy and every
10 years thereafter, the Secretary shall revise the national
strategy to reflect--
(1) new information on the impact of global warming on
wildlife and wildlife habitat; and
(2) advances in the development of strategies for adapting
to or mitigating the impact.
(d) Implementation.--
(1) Implementation on federal land systems.--To achieve the
goals of the national strategy and to implement measures for
the conservation of wildlife and wildlife habitat identified
in the national strategy--
(A) the Secretary of the Interior shall exercise the
authority of the Secretary under this title and other laws
within the jurisdiction of the Secretary pertaining to the
administration of land; and
(B) the Secretary of Agriculture shall exercise the
authority of the Secretary of Agriculture under this title
and other laws within the jurisdiction of the Secretary
pertaining to the administration of land.
(2) Wildlife conservation programs.--To the maximum extent
practicable, the Secretary, the Secretary of Agriculture, and
the Secretary of Commerce shall use the authorities of the
respective Secretary under other laws to achieve the goals of
the national strategy.
(e) Limitation on Effect.--Nothing in this section creates
new authority or expands any existing authority for the
Secretary to regulate the use of private property.
SEC. 113. ADVISORY BOARD; NATIONAL GLOBAL WARMING AND
WILDLIFE SCIENCE CENTER.
(a) Advisory Board.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish and appoint
the members of an Advisory Board that is composed of--
(A) not less than 10, and not more than 20, members
recommended by the President of the National Academy of
Sciences with expertise in wildlife biology, ecology, climate
change, and other relevant disciplines; and
(B) the Director of the National Global Warming and
Wildlife Science Center established under subsection (b), who
shall be an ex officio member of the Advisory Board.
(2) Functions.--The Advisory Board shall--
(A) provide scientific and technical advice and
recommendations to the Secretary on--
(i) the impact of global warming on wildlife and wildlife
habitat;
(ii) areas of habitat of particular importance for the
conservation of wildlife populations affected by global
warming; and
(iii) strategies and mechanisms to assist wildlife
populations and wildlife habitats in adapting to the impact
of global warming on the management of Federal land and in
other Federal programs for wildlife conservation;
(B) advise the National Global Warming and Wildlife Science
Center established under subsection (b) and review the
research programs of the Center; and
(C) advise the Secretary regarding the best science
available for purposes of developing and revising the
national strategy established under section 112.
(3) Public availability.--The advice and recommendations of
the Advisory Board shall be available to the public.
(b) National Global Warming and Wildlife Science Center.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a National
Global Warming and Wildlife Science Center within the United
States Geological Survey.
(2) Director.--The Center shall be headed by a Director,
appointed by the Secretary.
(3) Functions.--The Center shall--
(A) conduct scientific research on national issues relating
to the impact of global warming on wildlife and wildlife
habitat and mechanisms for adaptation to, mitigation of, or
prevention of the impact;
(B) consult with and advise Federal land management
agencies and Federal wildlife agencies on--
(i) the impact of global warming on wildlife and wildlife
habitat and mechanisms for adaptation to or mitigation of the
impact; and
(ii) the incorporation of information regarding the impact
and the adoption of mechanisms for adaptation or mitigation
of the impact in the management and planning for Federal land
and in the administration of Federal wildlife programs; and
(C) consult and, to the maximum extent practicable,
collaborate with State and local agencies, institutions of
higher education, and other public and private entities
regarding research, monitoring, and other efforts to address
the impact of global warming on wildlife and wildlife
habitat.
(4) Integration with other federal activities.--The
Secretary, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Secretary of
Commerce shall ensure that research and other activities
carried out under this section are integrated with climate
change program research and activities carried out under
other Federal law.
(c) Detection of Changes.--The Secretary, the Secretary of
Agriculture, and the Secretary of Commerce shall use existing
authorities to each carry out programs to detect changes in
wildlife abundance, distribution, and behavior related to
global warming, including--
(1) conducting species inventories on Federal land and in
marine areas within the exclusive economic zone of the United
States; and
(2) establishing and implementing robust, coordinated
monitoring programs.
SEC. 114. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
(a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as are necessary to carry out this subtitle.
(b) Implementation of National Strategy.--Of the amount
that is made available to carry out this subtitle for each
fiscal year--
(1) 45 percent of the amount shall be made available to
Federal agencies to develop and implement the national
strategy established
[[Page S13094]]
under section 112 in the administration of Federal land
systems, of which not less than--
(A) 35 percent shall be allocated to the Department of the
Interior--
(i) to operate the National Global Warming and Wildlife
Science Center established under section 113(b); and
(ii) to carry out the policy established under section 111,
and implement the national strategy, in the administration
of--
(I) the National Park System;
(II) the National Wildlife Refuge System; and
(III) public land of the Bureau of Land Management; and
(B) 10 percent shall be allocated to the Department of
Agriculture to carry out the policy established under section
111, and implement the national strategy, in the
administration of the National Forest System;
(2) 25 percent of the amount shall be made available to
Federal agencies to carry out the policy established under
section 111, and to implement the national strategy, in the
administration of fish and wildlife programs (other than for
the operation and maintenance of Federal land), of which--
(A) 10 percent shall be allocated to the Department of the
Interior to carry out endangered species, migratory bird, and
other fish and wildlife programs administered by the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, other than operations and
maintenance of the National Wildlife Refuges; and
(B) 15 percent shall be allocated to the Department of the
Interior to implement or fund activities that assist wildlife
and wildlife habitat in adapting to the impact of global
warming under applicable cooperative grant programs,
including--
(i) grants from the cooperative endangered species
conservation fund established under section 6(i) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1535(i));
(ii) Private Stewardship Grants;
(iii) grants from the North American Wetlands Conservation
Act (16 U.S.C. 4401 et seq.);
(iv) grants from the multinational species conservation
fund established under the heading ``multinational species
conservation fund'' of title I of the Department of the
Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (16
U.S.C. 4246);
(v) grants from the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation
Fund established by section 9(a) of the Neotropical Migratory
Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 6108(a)); and
(vi) grants under the National Fish Habitat Action Plan;
and
(3) 30 percent of the amount shall be made available for
grants to States and Indian tribes through the State and
tribal wildlife grants program authorized under section 121--
(A) to carry out activities that assist wildlife and
wildlife habitat in adapting to the impact of global warming
in accordance with State comprehensive wildlife conservation
plans developed and approved under the program; and
(B) to revise or supplement existing State comprehensive
wildlife conservation plans as necessary to include specific
strategies for assisting wildlife and wildlife habitat in
adapting to the impact of global warming.
(c) Availability to States and Indian Tribes.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), funding
under this section may be made available to States and Indian
tribes in accordance with this section.
(2) Initial 5-year period.--During the 5-year period
beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, a State shall
not be eligible to receive funds under this section unless
the head of the wildlife agency of the State has--
(A) approved, and provided to the Secretary, an express
strategy to assist wildlife populations in adapting to the
impact of global warming in the State; and
(B) incorporated the strategy as a supplement to the
comprehensive wildlife conservation plan of the State.
(3) Subsequent period.--After the 5-year period described
in paragraph (2), a State shall not be eligible to receive
funds under this section unless the State has submitted to
the Secretary, and the Secretary has approved, a revision to
the comprehensive wildlife conservation plan of the State
that--
(A) describes the impact of global warming on the diversity
and health of the wildlife populations and habitat of the
State;
(B) describes and prioritizes proposed conservation actions
to assist wildlife populations in adapting to the impact;
(C) establishes programs for monitoring the impact of
global warming on wildlife populations and wildlife habitat;
and
(D) establishes methods for--
(i) assessing the effectiveness of conservation actions
taken to assist wildlife populations in adapting to the
impact; and
(ii) adapting the actions to respond appropriately to new
information or changing conditions.
(d) Maintenance of Effort.--It is the intent of Congress
that funding provided under this subtitle supplements (and
not supplants) existing sources of funding for wildlife
conservation.
Subtitle B--State and Tribal Wildlife Grants Program
SEC. 121. STATE AND TRIBAL WILDLIFE GRANTS PROGRAM.
(a) Authorization of Program.--The Secretary shall
establish a State and tribal wildlife grants program under
which the Secretary shall provide wildlife conservation
grants to States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, the United States Virgin Islands,
and Indian tribes for the planning, development, and
implementation of programs for the benefit of wildlife and
wildlife habitat, including species that are not hunted or
fished.
(b) Allocation of Funds.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), of the amount
that is made available to carry out this section for each
fiscal year--
(A) 10 percent shall be used to conduct a competitive grant
program for Indian tribes that are not subject to any other
provision of this section;
(B) of the amount remaining after the application of
subparagraph (A) and after the deduction of the
administrative expenses incurred by the Secretary to carry
out this section--
(i) not more than \1/2\ of 1 percent shall be allocated to
provide grants to each of--
(I) the District of Columbia; and
(II) the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico; and
(ii) not more than \1/4\ of 1 percent shall be allocated to
each of--
(I) Guam;
(II) American Samoa;
(III) the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; and
(IV) the United States Virgin Islands; and
(C) of the amount remaining after the application of
subparagraphs (A) and (B), the Secretary shall apportion
among the States--
(i) \1/3\ based on the ratio that the land area of each
State bears to the total land area of all States; and
(ii) \2/3\ based on the ratio that the population of each
State bears to the total population of all States.
(2) Adjustments.--The amount apportioned under paragraph
(1)(C) for a fiscal year shall be adjusted equitably so that
no State is apportioned under that subparagraph an amount
that is--
(A) less than 1 percent of the amount available for
apportionment under that subparagraph for the fiscal year; or
(B) more than 5 percent of the amount.
(c) Cost Sharing.--
(1) Plan development grants.--The Federal share of the
costs of developing or revising a comprehensive wildlife
conservation plan shall not exceed 75 percent of the total
costs of developing or revising the plan.
(2) Plan implementation grants.--The Federal share of the
costs of carrying out an activity under an approved
comprehensive wildlife conservation plan carried out with a
grant under this section shall not exceed 50 percent of the
total costs of carrying out the activity.
(3) Prohibition on use of federal funds.--The non-Federal
share of costs of an activity carried out under this section
shall not be paid with amounts derived from any Federal grant
program.
(d) Requirement for Plan.--
(1) In general.--No State, territory, possession, or other
jurisdiction (referred to in this subsection as an ``eligible
jurisdiction'') shall be eligible for a grant under this
section unless the eligible jurisdiction submits to the
Secretary a comprehensive wildlife conservation plan that--
(A) complies with paragraph (2); and
(B) considers the broad range of wildlife and associated
habitats of the eligible jurisdiction, with appropriate
priority placed on species with the greatest conservation
need and taking into consideration the relative level of
funding available for the conservation of those species.
(2) Contents.--The comprehensive wildlife conservation plan
of an eligible jurisdiction shall contain--
(A) information on the distribution and abundance of
species of wildlife (including low and declining populations
as the fish and wildlife agency of the eligible jurisdiction
considers appropriate) that are indicative of the diversity
and health of the wildlife of the eligible jurisdiction;
(B) information on the location and relative condition of
key habitats and community types essential to the
conservation of species identified under subparagraph (A);
(C) a description of--
(i) problems that may adversely affect species identified
under subparagraph (A) or the habitats of the species; and
(ii) priority research and survey efforts that are needed
to identify factors that may assist in the restoration and
improved conservation of those species and habitats;
(D) a description of conservation actions proposed to
conserve the identified species and habitats and priorities
for implementing the actions;
(E) a proposed plan for monitoring species identified under
subparagraph (A) and the habitats of the species, for--
(i) monitoring the effectiveness of the conservation
actions proposed under subparagraph (D); and
(ii) adapting the conservation actions to respond
appropriately to new information or changing conditions;
(F) a description of procedures to review the comprehensive
wildlife conservation plan at intervals of not to exceed 10
years;
(G) a plan for coordinating the development,
implementation, review, and revision of the comprehensive
wildlife conservation plan with Federal, State, and local
agencies and Indian tribes that manage significant land and
water areas within the jurisdiction or administer programs
that significantly affect the conservation of identified
species and habitats; and
[[Page S13095]]
(H) provisions that provide an opportunity for broad public
participation as an essential element of the development,
revision, and implementation of the comprehensive wildlife
conservation plan.
(e) Existing Strategies and Activities.--
(1) Strategies.--A State comprehensive wildlife strategy
that was approved by the Secretary pursuant to a provision of
law in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this
Act shall remain in effect until the authority for the
strategy expires or is revised in accordance with the terms
of the strategy.
(2) Activities.--Except as specified in section 114(c),
funds made available under this section may be used to carry
out conservation and education activities conducted or
proposed to be conducted pursuant to a strategy described in
paragraph (1).
(f) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized
to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out
this section.
TITLE II--OCEAN PROGRAMS
SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.
This title may be cited as the ``Global Warming and
Acidification Coastal and Ocean Resiliency Act''.
SEC. 202. FINDINGS.
Congress finds that--
(1) healthy, diverse, and productive coastal, ocean, and
Great Lakes ecosystems, communities, and habitats are
critical to securing the full range of natural resource
benefits for the United States;
(2) healthy ecosystems are more resilient than degraded
ecosystems;
(3) resilient ecosystems can better adapt to changing
environmental conditions, including global warming and ocean
acidification;
(4) the effects of global warming, including relative sea
level rise and ocean acidification pose significant threats
to healthy ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems; and
(5) policies and programs designed to ensure the recovery,
resilience, and health of coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes
ecosystems and the resources of the ecosystems in the face of
environmental change are an urgent national priority.
Subtitle A--National Policy for Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes
Ecosystem Health and Resiliency
SEC. 211. NATIONAL POLICY ON OCEAN, COASTAL, AND GREAT LAKES
ECOSYSTEM HEALTH AND RESILIENCY.
It is the policy of the Federal Government, in cooperation
with State, tribal, and affected local governments, other
concerned public and private organizations, coastal and ocean
resource users, and citizens to take effective measures--
(1) to ensure the recovery, resiliency, and health of
ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems;
(2) to predict, plan for, and mitigate the impact on
coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes ecosystems from global
warming, including relative sea level rise, and from ocean
acidification;
(3) to plan for and mitigate the impact of the development
of offshore alternative energy resources and appropriate
carbon capture and sequestration activities; and
(4) to cooperate and collaborate to support improved and
enhanced ocean and coastal management in the United States.
SEC. 212. NATIONAL OCEAN, COASTAL, AND GREAT LAKES RESILIENCY
STRATEGY.
(a) Requirement.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 2 years after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Commerce (referred to
in this title as the ``Secretary'') shall implement the
national policy under section 211 by establishing a national
strategy to protect, maintain, and restore coastal and marine
ecosystems so that the ecosystems are more resilient and
better able to withstand the additional stresses associated
with global warming, including relative sea level rise, and
with ocean acidification.
(2) Measures.--In establishing the national strategy, the
Secretary shall provide for research and design of practical
measures--
(A) to avoid, alleviate, or mitigate the impact of global
warming, including relative sea level rise, and of ocean
acidification on ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems
and resources in the United States; and
(B) to ensure the recovery, resiliency, and health of
ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems.
(3) Administration.--Before and during the development of
the national strategy, the Secretary shall--
(A) base the national strategy on the best available
science;
(B) consult with--
(i) the Secretary of the Interior;
(ii) the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency;
(iii) Regional Fishery Management Councils;
(iv) State coastal management and fish and wildlife
agencies;
(v) Indian tribes;
(vi) local governments;
(vii) conservation organizations;
(viii) scientists; and
(ix) other interested stakeholders; and
(C) provide public notice and opportunity for comment.
(b) Contents.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall include in the
national strategy prioritized goals and measures and a plan
for implementation (including a timeframe)--
(A) to incorporate climate change adaptation strategies
into the planning and management of ocean and coastal
programs and resources administered by the Department of
Commerce;
(B) to incorporate the strategies into the planning and
management of ocean and coastal resources administered by
Federal and non-Federal governmental entities other than the
Department of Commerce;
(C) to support predictions of relative sea level rise;
(D) to protect, maintain, and restore coastal and marine
ecosystems so that the ecosystems are more resilient and
better able to withstand the additional stresses associated
with global warming, including relative sea level rise, and
with ocean acidification;
(E) to protect ocean and coastal species from the impact of
global warming and ocean acidification;
(F) to incorporate adaptation strategies for relative sea
level rise into coastal zone planning;
(G) to protect and restore ocean and coastal habitats to
build healthy and resilient ecosystems, including the
purchase of coastal and island land; and
(H) to promote the development of plans to mitigate at the
community level the economic consequences of global warming,
including relative sea level rise and ocean acidification.
(2) Coordination with other plans.--In developing the
national strategy, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent
practicable--
(A) take into consideration research and information
contained in--
(i) Federal, regional, and State management and restoration
plans;
(ii) the reports of the Pew Oceans Commission and the
United States Commission on Ocean Policy; and
(iii) any other relevant reports and information; and
(B) encourage and take into account regional plans for
protecting and restoring the health and resilience of ocean
and coastal ecosystems, including the Great Lakes.
(c) Revisions.--Not later than 5 years after the date of
the initial establishment of the national strategy and each
10 years thereafter, the Secretary shall revise the national
strategy to reflect--
(1) new information on the impact of global warming,
including relative sea level rise, and of acidification on
ocean, coastal and Great Lakes ecosystems and the resources
of the ecosystems; and
(2) advances in the development of strategies for adapting
to or mitigating for the impact.
(d) Implementation.--To achieve the goals of the national
strategy, each Federal agency shall (directly and in
cooperation with other agencies) implement measures for the
conservation of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems
under the jurisdiction of the Federal agency that promote the
national strategy established under this section.
SEC. 213. ADVISORY BOARD.
(a) In General.--The Secretary shall establish and appoint
the members of an Advisory Board that is composed of not less
than 10, and not more than 20, members recommended by the
President of the National Academy of Sciences with expertise
in ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes biology, ecology,
fisheries, climate change, ocean acidification, and other
relevant disciplines, including economics at the community
level.
(b) Function.--The Advisory Board shall--
(1) provide scientific and technical advice and
recommendations to the Secretary on--
(A) the impact of global warming, including relative sea
level rise, and of acidification on ocean and coastal
ecosystems, resources, ecological and coastal communities,
and habitats; and
(B) strategies and mechanisms to mitigate the impact of
global warming, including relative sea level rise, and of
acidification on ocean and coastal ecosystems;
(2) advise the Secretary on priorities for research or
information collection; and
(3) advise the Secretary on priority needs for achieving
systematic improvements in ocean and coastal resiliency for
the purposes of section 212.
SEC. 214. IMPLEMENTATION OF NATIONAL STRATEGY.
(a) In General.--Of the amount that is made available to
carry out this subtitle for each fiscal year--
(1) 40 percent shall be made available for the carrying out
of Federal responsibilities to develop and implement the
national strategy established under section 212; and
(2) 60 percent shall be used to make grants under
subsection (b).
(b) Grants.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall make grants to
eligible entities to pay the Federal share (as determined by
the Secretary) to carry out activities that contribute to or
result in protecting, maintaining, or restoring the
resilience and health of coastal, ocean, and Great Lakes
ecosystems and resources, including planning and scientific
research to support such purposes.
(2) Eligible entities.--To be eligible to receive a grant
under this subsection, an entity shall be--
(A) a Federal agency;
(B) an agency of a State or political subdivision;
[[Page S13096]]
(C) a regional partnership;
(D) an Indian tribe;
(E) an institution of higher education; or
(F) a nongovernmental organization.
(3) Eligible uses.--A grant provided under this subsection
may only be used to carry out an activity described in
paragraph (1) that is approved by the Secretary.
(4) Prioritization.--In approving applications under this
subsection, the Secretary shall give priority to proposals
that--
(A) implement measures to enhance the health or resilience
of coastal, ocean, or Great Lakes areas of national
significance, including biological, historical, and cultural
measures;
(B) result in systematic improvements to the resilience and
health of coastal and ocean ecosystems and resources;
(C) are sufficiently cooperative and broad in geographic
scope to address the problem or need; and
(D) demonstrate cost-effectiveness based on ecosystems
services provided per dollar of Federal expenditure,
including consideration of the potential for a funding match.
(5) Guidance.--The Secretary shall issue guidance regarding
a process for--
(A) the approval or disapproval of applications for grants
under this subsection, including opportunities for public
comment; and
(B) the establishment of annual and multiyear national
funding priorities.
(6) Evaluation.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary shall establish a system to
provide for an annual external evaluation of each grant that
measures the progress of implementation of the grant against
the goals and objectives of the grant project.
(B) Public availability.--The Secretary shall make the
results of the evaluations publicly available.
SEC. 215. REPORTS.
(a) National Academy of Sciences.--The Secretary shall
enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of
Sciences under which the Academy shall report to Congress,
not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this
Act, on the current and projected impact of global warming,
including relative sea level rise, of ocean acidification,
and on effective mitigation strategies for the ocean,
coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources of the
United States.
(b) Report to Congress.--The Secretary shall make available
to Congress a copy of the strategy and implementation plan
established under this subtitle (including any updates to the
strategy and plan).
SEC. 216. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as are
necessary to carry out this subtitle.
Subtitle B--Planning for Climate Change in Coastal Zone
SEC. 221. PLANNING FOR CLIMATE CHANGE IN COASTAL ZONE.
(a) In General.--The Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972
(16 U.S.C. 1451 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``SEC. 320. CLIMATE CHANGE RESILIENCY PLANNING.
``(a) Definitions.--In this section, the terms `ecological
processes', `habitat', and `wildlife' have the meanings given
those terms in section 2 of the Global Warming Wildlife
Survival Act.
``(b) Program.--The Secretary shall establish, consistent
with the national policies established under section 303, a
coastal climate change resiliency planning and response
program to--
``(1) provide assistance to coastal states to develop and
implement coastal climate change resiliency plans pursuant to
approved management programs approved under section 306, to
prepare for and reduce, in an environmentally sensitive
manner, the negative consequences to the coastal zone that
may result from global warming and ocean acidification; and
``(2) provide financial and technical assistance and
training to enable coastal states to implement plans
developed pursuant to this section through enforceable
policies of the coastal states.
``(c) Guidelines.--Not later than 180 days after the date
of enactment of this section, the Secretary, in consultation
with the coastal states, shall issue guidelines for the
implementation of the grant program established under
subsection (d).
``(d) Climate Change Resiliency Planning Grants.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations, the Secretary may make a grant to any coastal
state for the purpose of developing and implementing climate
change resiliency plans pursuant to guidelines issued by the
Secretary under subsection (c).
``(2) Plan content.--
``(A) In general.--A plan developed with a grant under this
section shall include adaptation strategies for fish and
wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and associated
ecological process as are necessary to assist fish and
wildlife, fish and wildlife habitat, and associated
ecological processes to adapt to, become resilient to, and
mitigate the impact of, global warming and ocean
acidification.
``(B) Inclusions.--The plans shall specifically include--
``(i) adaptive management strategies for land and water use
to respond or adapt to changing environmental conditions,
including strategies to protect biodiversity and establish
habitat buffer zones, migration corridors, and climate
refugia; and
``(ii) requirements--
``(I) to initiate and maintain long-term monitoring of
environmental change to assess coastal zone resiliency; and
``(II) if necessary, to adjust adaptive management
strategies and new planning guidelines to attain the policies
under section 303.
``(3) Allocation.--Grants under this section shall be--
``(A) available only to coastal states with management
programs approved by the Secretary under section 306; and
``(B) allocated among the coastal states in a manner
consistent with regulations promulgated pursuant to section
306(c).
``(4) Priority.--In the awarding grants under this
subsection, the Secretary may give priority to any coastal
state that has received grant funding to develop program
changes pursuant to paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (5), (6), (7),
and (8) of section 309(a).
``(5) Technical assistance.--The Secretary may provide
technical assistance to a coastal state (consistent with
section 310) to ensure the timely development of plans
supported by grants awarded under this subsection.
``(6) Federal approval.--In order to be eligible for a
grant under subsection (e), a coastal state shall have the
plan of the coastal state developed under this section
approved by the Secretary.
``(e) Coastal Resiliency Project Grants.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to the availability of
appropriations, the Secretary may make grants to any coastal
state that has a climate change resiliency plan approved
under subsection (d)(6) for implementation of the plan.
``(2) Program requirements.--
``(A) In general.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
approval of the first plan approved under subsection (d)(6),
the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register
requirements regarding applications, allocations, eligible
activities, and all terms and conditions for grants awarded
under this subsection.
``(B) Merit-based awards.--No less than 30 percent of the
funds made available for any fiscal year for grants under
this subsection shall be awarded through a merit-based
competitive process.''.
(b) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 318(a) of the
Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1464(a)) is
amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; and''; and
(3) by adding by adding at the end the following:
``(3) for grants under subsections (d) and (e) of section
320, such sums as are necessary for each fiscal year.''.
TITLE III--SPECIAL IMPERILED SPECIES PROGRAMS
SEC. 301. DEFINITIONS.
In this title:
(1) Director.--The term ``Director'' means the Director of
the United States Geological Survey.
(2) Ecosystem.--The term ``ecosystem'' means any complex of
a plant, animal, fungal, and microorganism community and the
associated nonliving environment of the community that
interacts as an ecological unit, including the species and
the viability of species within the community.
(3) Imperiled species.--The term ``imperiled species''
means--
(A) a species listed as an endangered species or threatened
species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.);
(B) a species proposed for listing under that Act;
(C) a candidate species under that Act.;
(D) a species listed as an endangered species under any
State law; and
(E) a species, the population of which is declining at a
significant rate.
SEC. 302. REGIONAL ECOLOGICAL SYMPOSIA.
(a) In General.--Not later than 18 months after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Director, in coordination with the
Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and
the Director of the National Marine Fisheries Service, shall
convene multiple regional scientific symposia to examine the
ecological impact of global warming on each imperiled species
in each ecosystem of the United States.
(b) Composition.--A symposium convened in a region shall
include--
(1) scientific representatives from Federal agencies with
species- or ecosystem-related activities in the region;
(2) if appropriate, scientists or technical experts
representing State, local, and tribal governments; and
(3) scientific experts from institutions of higher
education and scientific societies, and any other independent
scientists with sufficient qualifications and credentials,
particularly with respect to site-specific ecological
conditions and the status of species and ecological
communities of concern in the region.
(c) Duties.--A symposium convened in a region shall--
(1) identify and assess fish, wildlife, and plant species,
the habitats of the species, and the natural processes,
ecosystems, and landscapes that support the habitats, that
are most imperiled by global warming; and
(2) focus on imperiled species that are located on public
land, declining migratory
[[Page S13097]]
birds species, and other species that are protected by treaty
or international agreement.
SEC. 303. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES REPORT.
(a) In General.--As soon as practicable after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior shall
enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of
Sciences under which the Academy shall convene a panel--
(1) to examine and analyze the reports, data, documents,
and other information created by the multiple regional
scientific symposia convened in accordance with section
302(a); and
(2) to prepare a report that takes into consideration each
report, data, document, and other item of information
described in paragraph (1).
(b) Contents of Report.--The report required under
subsection (a)(2) shall include--
(1) an identification and assessment of--
(A) the impact of global warming on each imperiled species
and ecosystem in the United States (including the territories
of the United States); and
(B) different ecological scenarios that may result from
different intensities, rates, and other critical
manifestations of global warming;
(2) recommendations for specific roles to be played by
Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies and private
parties in assisting imperiled species in adapting to, and
surviving the impacts of, climate change, including a
recommended list of prioritized remediation actions by those
agencies and parties; and
(3) other relevant ecological information.
(c) Public Availability.--The recommendations and report
required under this section shall be made available to the
public as soon as practicable after the recommendations and
report are complete.
(d) Use of Report by Certain Heads of Federal Agencies.--
The Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Commerce, and
the Secretary of the Interior, in carrying out each national
policy described in sections 111 and 211, shall take into
account the recommendations and report required under this
section.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Hagel, and Mr. Lugar):
S. 2205. A bill to authorize the cancellation of removal and
adjustment of status of certain alien students who are long-term United
States residents and who entered the United States as children, and for
other purposes; read the first time.
Mr. DURBIN. 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
placed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2205
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 ``Development, Relief, and
Education for Alien Minors Act of 2007'' or the ``DREAM Act
of 2007''.
SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Institution of higher education.--The term
``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given
that term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1001).
(2) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Homeland Security.
(3) Uniformed services.--The term ``uniformed services''
has the meaning given that term in section 101(a) of title
10, United States Code.
SEC. 3. CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL AND ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS OF
CERTAIN LONG-TERM RESIDENTS WHO ENTERED THE
UNITED STATES AS CHILDREN.
(a) Special Rule for Certain Long-Term Residents Who
Entered the United States as Children.--
(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law
and except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Secretary
may cancel removal of, and adjust to the status of an alien
lawfully admitted for permanent residence, subject to the
conditional basis described in section 4, an alien who is
inadmissible or deportable from the United States, if the
alien demonstrates that--
(A) the alien has been physically present in the United
States for a continuous period of not less than 5 years
immediately preceding the date of enactment of this Act, and
had not yet reached the age of 16 years at the time of
initial entry;
(B) the alien has been a person of good moral character
since the date of enactment of this Act;
(C) the alien--
(i) is not inadmissible under paragraph (2), paragraph (3),
subparagraph (B), (C), (E), (F), or (G) of paragraph (6), or
subsection (C) of paragraph (10) of section 212(a) of the
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)), except
that if the alien is inadmissible solely under subparagraph
(C) or (F) of paragraph (6) of such section, the alien had
not yet reached the age of 16 years at the time the violation
was committed; and
(ii) is not deportable under subparagraph (E) or (G) of
paragraph (1), paragraph (2), subparagraph (B), (C), or (D)
of paragraph (3), paragraph (4), or paragraph (6) of section
237(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C.
1227(a)), except that if the alien is deportable solely under
subparagraph (C) or (D) of paragraph (3) of such section, the
alien had not yet reached the age of 16 years at the time the
violation was committed;
(D) the alien, at the time of application, has been
admitted to an institution of higher education in the United
States, or has earned a high school diploma or obtained a
general education development certificate in the United
States;
(E) the alien has never been under a final administrative
or judicial order of exclusion, deportation, or removal,
unless the alien--
(i) has remained in the United States under color of law
after such order was issued; or
(ii) received the order before attaining the age of 16
years; and
(F) the alien was had not yet reached the age of 30 years
on the date of enactment of this Act.
(2) Waiver.--Notwithstanding paragraph (1), the Secretary
of Homeland Security may waive the ground of ineligibility
under section 212(a)(6) of the Immigration and Nationality
Act and the ground of deportability under paragraphs (1),
(3), and (6) of section 237(a) of that Act for humanitarian
purposes or family unity or when it is otherwise in the
public interest.
(3) Procedures.--The Secretary shall provide a procedure by
regulation allowing eligible individuals to apply
affirmatively for the relief available under this subsection
without being placed in removal proceedings.
(b) Termination of Continuous Period.--For purposes of this
section, any period of continuous residence or continuous
physical presence in the United States of an alien who
applies for cancellation of removal under this section shall
not terminate when the alien is served a notice to appear
under section 239(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(8 U.S.C. 1229(a)).
(c) Treatment of Certain Breaks in Presence.--
(1) In general.--An alien shall be considered to have
failed to maintain continuous physical presence in the United
States under subsection (a) if the alien has departed from
the United States for any period in excess of 90 days or for
any periods in the aggregate exceeding 180 days.
(2) Extensions for exceptional circumstances.--The
Secretary may extend the time periods described in paragraph
(1) if the alien demonstrates that the failure to timely
return to the United States was due to exceptional
circumstances. The exceptional circumstances determined
sufficient to justify such an extension shall be no less
compelling than serious illness of the alien, or death or
serious illness of a parent, grandparent, sibling, or child
of the alien.
(d) Exemption From Numerical Limitations.--Nothing in this
section may be construed to apply a numerical limitation on
the number of aliens who may be eligible for cancellation of
removal or adjustment of status under this section.
(e) Regulations.--
(1) Proposed regulations.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
publish proposed regulations implementing this section. Such
regulations shall be effective immediately on an interim
basis, but are subject to change and revision after public
notice and opportunity for a period for public comment.
(2) Interim, final regulations.--Within a reasonable time
after publication of the interim regulations in accordance
with paragraph (1), the Secretary shall publish final
regulations implementing this section.
SEC. 4. CONDITIONAL PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS.
(a) In General.--
(1) Conditional basis for status.--Notwithstanding any
other provision of law, and except as provided in section 5,
an alien whose status has been adjusted under section 3 to
that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence
shall be considered to have obtained such status on a
conditional basis subject to the provisions of this section.
Such conditional permanent resident status shall be valid for
a period of 6 years, subject to termination under subsection
(b).
(2) Notice of requirements.--
(A) At time of obtaining permanent residence.--At the time
an alien obtains permanent resident status on a conditional
basis under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall provide for
notice to the alien regarding the provisions of this section
and the requirements of subsection (c) to have the
conditional basis of such status removed.
(B) Effect of failure to provide notice.--The failure of
the Secretary to provide a notice under this paragraph--
(i) shall not affect the enforcement of the provisions of
this Act with respect to the alien; and
(ii) shall not give rise to any private right of action by
the alien.
(3) Limitation on removal.--The Secretary may not remove an
alien who has a pending application for conditional permanent
resident status under this section.
(b) Termination of Status.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall terminate the
conditional permanent resident status of any alien who
obtained such status under this Act, if the Secretary
determines that the alien--
(A) ceases to meet the requirements of subparagraph (B) or
(C) of section 3(a)(1);
(B) has become a public charge; or
(C) has received a dishonorable or other than honorable
discharge from the uniformed services.
[[Page S13098]]
(2) Return to previous immigration status.--Any alien whose
conditional permanent resident status is terminated under
paragraph (1) shall return to the immigration status the
alien had immediately prior to receiving conditional
permanent resident status under this Act.
(c) Requirements of Timely Petition for Removal of
Condition.--
(1) In general.--In order for the conditional basis of
permanent resident status obtained by an alien under
subsection (a) to be removed, the alien must file with the
Secretary, in accordance with paragraph (3), a petition which
requests the removal of such conditional basis and which
provides, under penalty of perjury, the facts and information
so that the Secretary may make the determination described in
paragraph (2)(A).
(2) Adjudication of petition to remove condition.--
(A) In general.--If a petition is filed in accordance with
paragraph (1) for an alien, the Secretary shall make a
determination as to whether the alien meets the requirements
set out in subparagraphs (A) through (E) of subsection
(d)(1).
(B) Removal of conditional basis if favorable
determination.--If the Secretary determines that the alien
meets such requirements, the Secretary shall notify the alien
of such determination and immediately remove the conditional
basis of the status of the alien.
(C) Termination if adverse determination.--If the Secretary
determines that the alien does not meet such requirements,
the Secretary shall notify the alien of such determination
and terminate the conditional permanent resident status of
the alien as of the date of the determination.
(3) Time to file petition.--An alien may petition to remove
the conditional basis to lawful resident status during the
period beginning 180 days before and ending 2 years after
either the date that is 6 years after the date of the
granting of conditional permanent resident status or any
other expiration date of the conditional permanent resident
status as extended by the Secretary in accordance with this
Act. The alien shall be deemed in conditional permanent
resident status in the United States during the period in
which the petition is pending.
(d) Details of Petition.--
(1) Contents of petition.--Each petition for an alien under
subsection (c)(1) shall contain information to permit the
Secretary to determine whether each of the following
requirements is met:
(A) The alien has demonstrated good moral character during
the entire period the alien has been a conditional permanent
resident.
(B) The alien is in compliance with section 3(a)(1)(C).
(C) The alien has not abandoned the alien's residence in
the United States. The Secretary shall presume that the alien
has abandoned such residence if the alien is absent from the
United States for more than 365 days, in the aggregate,
during the period of conditional residence, unless the alien
demonstrates that alien has not abandoned the alien's
residence. An alien who is absent from the United States due
to active service in the uniformed services has not abandoned
the alien's residence in the United States during the period
of such service.
(D) The alien has completed at least 1 of the following:
(i) The alien has acquired a degree from an institution of
higher education in the United States or has completed at
least 2 years, in good standing, in a program for a
bachelor's degree or higher degree in the United States.
(ii) The alien has served in the uniformed services for at
least 2 years and, if discharged, has received an honorable
discharge.
(E) The alien has provided a list of each secondary school
(as that term is defined in section 9101 of the Elementary
and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801)) that
the alien attended in the United States.
(2) Hardship exception.--
(A) In general.--The Secretary may, in the Secretary's
discretion, remove the conditional status of an alien if the
alien--
(i) satisfies the requirements of subparagraphs (A), (B),
and (C) of paragraph (1);
(ii) demonstrates compelling circumstances for the
inability to complete the requirements described in
subparagraph (D) of such paragraph; and
(iii) demonstrates that the alien's removal from the United
States would result in exceptional and extremely unusual
hardship to the alien or the alien's spouse, parent, or child
who is a citizen or a lawful permanent resident of the United
States.
(B) Extension.--Upon a showing of good cause, the Secretary
may extend the period of conditional resident status for the
purpose of completing the requirements described in
subparagraph (D) of paragraph (1).
(e) Treatment of Period for Purposes of Naturalization.--
For purposes of title III of the Immigration and Nationality
Act (8 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.), in the case of an alien who is
in the United States as a lawful permanent resident on a
conditional basis under this section, the alien shall be
considered to have been admitted as an alien lawfully
admitted for permanent residence and to be in the United
States as an alien lawfully admitted to the United States for
permanent residence. However, the conditional basis must be
removed before the alien may apply for naturalization.
SEC. 5. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN APPLICANTS.
If, on the date of enactment of this Act, an alien has
satisfied all the requirements of subparagraphs (A) through
(F) of section 3(a)(1) and subparagraph (D) of section
4(d)(1), the Secretary may adjust the status of the alien to
that of a conditional resident in accordance with section 3.
The alien may petition for removal of such condition at the
end of the conditional residence period in accordance with
section 4(c) if the alien has met the requirements of
subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of section 4(d)(1) during the
entire period of conditional residence.
SEC. 6. EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION.
(a) Secretary.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the
Secretary shall have exclusive jurisdiction to determine
eligibility for relief under this Act.
(b) Attorney General.--Notwithstanding subsection (a), if
an alien has been placed into deportation, exclusion, or
removal proceedings either prior to or after filing an
application for relief under this Act, the Attorney General
shall have exclusive jurisdiction and shall assume all the
powers and duties of the Secretary under this Act until
proceedings are terminated. If a final order of deportation,
exclusion, or removal is entered for the alien the Secretary
shall resume all powers and duties under this Act with
respect to the alien.
SEC. 7. STAY OF REMOVAL OF CERTAIN ALIENS ENROLLED IN PRIMARY
OR SECONDARY SCHOOL.
(a) Stay of Removal.--The Attorney General shall stay the
removal proceedings of any alien who--
(1) meets all the requirements of subparagraphs (A), (B),
(C), (E), and (F) of section 3(a)(1);
(2) is at least 12 years of age; and
(3) is enrolled full time in a primary or secondary school.
(b) Employment.--An alien whose removal is stayed pursuant
to subsection (a) may be engaged in employment in the United
States consistent with the Fair Labor Standards Act (29
U.S.C. 201 et seq.) and State and local laws governing
minimum age for employment.
(c) Lift of Stay.--The Attorney General shall lift the stay
granted pursuant to subsection (a) if the alien--
(1) is no longer enrolled in a primary or secondary school;
or
(2) ceases to meet the requirements of subsection (a)(1).
SEC. 8. PENALTIES FOR FALSE STATEMENTS IN APPLICATION.
Whoever files an application for relief under this Act and
willfully and knowingly falsifies, misrepresents, or conceals
a material fact or makes any false or fraudulent statement or
representation, or makes or uses any false writing or
document knowing the same to contain any false or fraudulent
statement or entry, shall be fined in accordance with title
18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 5 years,
or both.
SEC. 9. CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION.
(a) Prohibition.--Except as provided in subsection (b), no
officer or employee of the United States may--
(1) use the information furnished by the applicant pursuant
to an application filed under this Act to initiate removal
proceedings against any persons identified in the
application;
(2) make any publication whereby the information furnished
by any particular individual pursuant to an application under
this Act can be identified; or
(3) permit anyone other than an officer or employee of the
United States to examine applications filed under this Act.
(b) Required Disclosure.--The Attorney General or the
Secretary shall provide the information furnished under this
section, and any other information derived from such
furnished information, to--
(1) a duly recognized law enforcement entity in connection
with an investigation or prosecution of an offense described
in paragraph (2) or (3) of section 212(a) of the Immigration
and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)), when such information
is requested in writing by such entity; or
(2) an official coroner for purposes of affirmatively
identifying a deceased individual (whether or not such
individual is deceased as a result of a crime).
(c) Penalty.--Whoever knowingly uses, publishes, or permits
information to be examined in violation of this section shall
be fined not more than $10,000.
SEC. 10. HIGHER EDUCATION ASSISTANCE.
Notwithstanding any provision of the Higher Education Act
of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001 et seq.), with respect to assistance
provided under title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965
(20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.), an alien who adjusts status to that
of a lawful permanent resident under this Act shall be
eligible only for the following assistance under such title:
(1) Student loans under parts B, D, and E of such title IV,
subject to the requirements of such parts.
(2) Federal work-study programs under part C of such title
IV, subject to the requirements of such part.
(3) Services under such title IV, subject to the
requirements for such services.
SEC. 11. GAO REPORT.
Not later than 7 years after the date of enactment of this
Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall
submit a report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the
Senate and the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of
Representatives setting forth--
(1) the number of aliens who were eligible for cancellation
of removal and adjustment of status under section 3(a);
[[Page S13099]]
(2) the number of aliens who applied for adjustment of
status under section 3(a);
(3) the number of aliens who were granted adjustment of
status under section 3(a); and
(4) the number of aliens whose conditional permanent
resident status was removed under section 4.
______
By Mr. SCHUMER (for himself, Mr. Specter, Mr. Cochran, and Mr.
Harkin:
S.J. Res. 21. A joint resolution proposing amendment to the
Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and
expenditures intended to affect elections; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am proud to join Senators Schumer,
Specter and Cochran in introducing a constitutional amendment to
overturn the 1976 Supreme Court decision in the case of Buckley v.
Valeo and restore Congress's power to regulate campaign finances.
This constitutional amendment is a necessary first step in restoring
confidence in our system of government. The Court's decision in
Buckley, which equated money with speech, was fundamentally flawed.
Unfortunately, since that decision, our democracy has been perverted.
Costs of elections have spiraled out of control, office seekers are
required to spend more time than ever raising money, and special
interests correspondingly have greater access than ever before. As a
result, the integrity of our democracy continues to wane.
Make no mistake, I am extremely reluctant to amend the Constitution.
Amending the Constitution rightly is an extraordinary step that has
seldom been done in our history. But, when it has been truly needed, we
have done so. Reluctantly, I have reached the conclusion that it is
needed now. Without this amendment, our nation is simply too limited in
its ability to deal with corruption and to restore confidence in our
electoral system. The integrity of our democratic system not only deems
it appropriate for us to approve a constitutional amendment, it
requires it.
Until we have the ability to truly create a system of campaign
finance, we will continue to have an escalation of spending on
campaigns, and an escalation of continued distrust by the American
people in their political system. This amendment is a necessary first
step and I encourage my colleagues to support this vital measure.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the joint
resolution be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the joint resolution was
ordered to be placed in the Record, as follows:
S. J. Res. 21
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of
each House concurring therein), That the following article is
proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United
States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as
part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of
three-fourths of the several States within seven years after
the date of its submission by the Congress:
``Article--
``Section 1. Congress shall have power to regulate the
raising and spending of money, including through setting
limits, for campaigns for nomination for election to, or for
election to, Federal office.
``Section 2. A State shall have power to regulate the
raising and spending of money, including through setting
limits, for--
``(1) State or local ballot initiatives, referenda,
plebiscites, or other similar ballot measures; and
``(2) campaigns for nomination for election to, or for
election to, State or local office.
``Section 3. Congress shall have power to implement and
enforce this article by appropriate legislation.''.
____________________