[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 85 (Thursday, May 22, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4795-S4805]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Lugar):
  S. 3052. A bill to provide for the transfer of naval vessels to 
certain foreign recipients; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today, Senator Lugar and I are introducing 
the Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2008, a bill to permit the transfer of 
certain U.S. Navy vessels to particular foreign countries. All of the 
proposed ship transfer authorizations have been requested by the U.S. 
Navy, with the approval of the Office of Management and Budget.
  Pursuant to section 824(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act 
for fiscal year 1994, as amended, 10 U.S.C. 7307(a), a naval vessel 
that is in excess of 3,000 tons or that is less than 20 years of age 
may not be disposed of to another nation unless the disposition of that 
vessel is approved by law enacted after August 5, 1974. The bill we 
introduce today would provide that required approval for six transfers: 
a guided missile frigate for Pakistan; two minehunter coastal ships for 
Greece; an oiler for Chile; and two amphibious tank landing ships for 
Peru. These would all be grant transfers under section 516 of the 
Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j). If any Member of this 
body has questions or concerns regarding one or more of the proposed 
ship transfers, please let us know.
  The bill also contains provisions that are traditionally included in 
ship transfer bills, relating to transfer costs and repair and 
refurbishment of the ships, and exempting the value of a vessel 
transferred on a grant basis from the aggregate value of excess defense 
articles in a given fiscal year.
  The authority provided by this bill would expire 2 years after the 
date of enactment of the bill.
  Finally, the Department of Defense has provided the following 
information on this bill:

       These proposed transfers would improve the United States' 
     political and military relationships with close allies. They 
     would support strategic engagement goals and regional 
     security cooperation objectives. Active use of former naval 
     vessels by coalition forces in support of regional priorities 
     is more advantageous than retaining vessels in the Navy's 
     inactive fleet and disposing of them by scrapping or another 
     method.
       The United States would incur no costs in transferring 
     these naval vessels. The recipients would be responsible for 
     all costs associated with the transfers, including 
     maintenance, repairs, training, and fleet turnover costs.
       This act does not alter the effect of the Toxic Substances 
     Control Act, or any other law, with regard to their 
     applicability to the transfer of ships by the U.S. to foreign 
     countries for military or humanitarian use. The laws and 
     regulations that apply today would apply in the same manner 
     if this section were enacted.

  The Secretary of the Navy, the Honorable Donald C. Winter, has added: 
``Expeditious enactment of the proposal is in the best interests of the 
Navy's Maritime Strategy as it will allow us to strengthen the 
capabilities of partner nations.''
  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. 3052

       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 ``Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 
     2008''.

     SEC. 2. TRANSFER OF NAVAL VESSELS TO CERTAIN FOREIGN 
                   RECIPIENTS.

       (a) Transfers by Grant.--The President is authorized to 
     transfer vessels to foreign recipients on a grant basis under 
     section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 
     2321j), as follows:
       (1) Pakistan.--To the Government of Pakistan, the OLIVER 
     HAZARD PERRY class guided missile frigate MCINERNEY (FFG-8).
       (2) Greece.--To the Government of Greece, the OSPREY class 
     minehunter coastal ships OSPREY (MHC-51) and ROBIN (MHC-54).
       (3) Chile.--To the Government of Chile, the KAISER class 
     oiler ANDREW J. HIGGINS (AO-190).
       (4) Peru.--To the Government of Peru, the NEWPORT class 
     amphibious tank landing ships FRESNO (LST-1182) and RACINE 
     (LST-1191).
       (b) Grants Not Counted in Annual Total of Transferred 
     Excess Defense Articles.--The value of a vessel transferred 
     to a recipient on a grant basis pursuant to authority 
     provided by subsection (a) shall not be counted against the 
     aggregate value of excess defense articles transferred in any 
     fiscal year under section 516 of the Foreign Assistance Act 
     of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2321j).
       (c) Costs of Transfers.--Any expense incurred by the United 
     States in connection with a transfer authorized by this 
     section

[[Page S4796]]

     shall be charged to the recipient (notwithstanding section 
     516(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 
     2321j(e))).
       (d) Repair and Refurbishment in United States Shipyards.--
     To the maximum extent practicable, the President shall 
     require, as a condition of the transfer of a vessel under 
     this section, that the recipient to which the vessel is 
     transferred have such repair or refurbishment of the vessel 
     as is needed, before the vessel joins the naval forces of the 
     recipient, performed at a shipyard located in the United 
     States, including a United States Navy shipyard.
       (e) Expiration of Authority.--The authority to transfer a 
     vessel under this section shall expire at the end of the 2-
     year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH (for himself and Ms. Cantwell):
  S. 3053. A bill to amend title XI of the Social Security Act to 
provide grants for eligible entities to provide services to improve 
financial literacy among older individuals; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. SMITH. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Cantwell, I introduce 
a bill to provide grants to Area Agencies on Aging to provide services 
to improve financial literacy among older individuals.
  A number of trends have occurred over the past few years that make 
financial literacy a critical element of retirement security. The 
personal savings rate in the United States has declined dramatically 
over the last two decades. According to the Commerce Department, the 
personal savings rate was 0.2 percent in March of this year. This means 
for every $1,000 of after-tax income, the average person saved only $2.
  In addition, the shift from defined benefit to defined contribution 
retirement plans has generally placed the burden on employees to 
effectively manage the investment of their pensions.
  However, many Americans, including older Americans, lack financial 
literacy skills. In the 2008 Retirement Confidence Survey by EBRI/
Matthew Greenwald & Associates, 40 percent of retirees surveyed 
reported that they are not knowledgeable about investments and 
investment strategies. In addition, a 2003 national survey by AARP of 
consumers aged 45 and older found that they often lacked knowledge of 
basic financial and investment terms. For example, only about half of 
respondents reported knowing that diversification of investments 
reduces risk.
  The Smith-Cantwell bill will improve older Americans' financial 
literacy and help them better prepare for and manage their assets in 
retirement. Under the bill, grants will be provided to Area Agencies on 
Aging to enable these organizations to provide services to improve 
financial literacy among older individuals, especially older women. 
These services include education, training and other assistance.
  This bipartisan financial literacy bill will help increase older 
Americans' financial literacy so they can make more informed and 
prudent investment and retirement planning decisions. And I am pleased 
that the Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement and the National 
Association of Area Agencies on Aging have both endorsed this bill.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact this important 
bill. 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. 3053

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

     SECTION 1. FINANCIAL LITERACY SERVICES.

       Part A of title XI of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 
     1301 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new section:


                     ``financial literacy services

       ``Sec. 1150A.  (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Area agency on aging.--The term `area agency on 
     aging' has the meaning given that term in section 102 of the 
     Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3002).
       ``(2) Financial literacy services.--The term `financial 
     literacy services' means the services described in subsection 
     (b)(1).
       ``(3) Older individual.--The term `older individual' has 
     the meaning given that term in such section 102.
       ``(b) Grants for Services.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall make grants to 
     eligible entities and other entities determined appropriate 
     by the Secretary to enable the entities to provide services 
     to improve financial literacy among older individuals, 
     including older individuals who are women, and the family 
     members and legal representatives of such individuals. The 
     Secretary shall make the grants on a competitive basis, and 
     nationwide.
       ``(2) Eligible entities.--To be eligible to receive a grant 
     under this subsection, an entity shall be an area agency on 
     aging or another entity that meets such requirements as the 
     Secretary may specify.
       ``(3) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this subsection, an entity shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may require. In the case of an 
     entity who intends to provide the financial literacy services 
     jointly with other services as described in paragraph (4)(C), 
     the application shall include information demonstrating that 
     the entity has the capacity to provide the services jointly.
       ``(4) Use of funds.--
       ``(A) In general.--An entity that receives a grant under 
     this subsection shall use the funds made available through 
     the grant to provide financial literacy services, such as 
     financial literacy education, training, and assistance.
       ``(B) Provision through contracts.--The entity may provide 
     the services directly or by entering into a contract with an 
     organization that provides counseling, advice, or 
     representation to older individuals and the family members 
     and legal representatives of such individuals in a community 
     served by the entity.
       ``(C) Provision with other services.--The entity may 
     provide the services alone or jointly with other services 
     provided by or funded by the eligible entity, such as--
       ``(i) services provided through State Health Insurance 
     Assistance Programs;
       ``(ii) services provided through a Long-Term Care Ombudsman 
     program under section 307(a)(9) or 712 of the Older Americans 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3027, 3058g);
       ``(iii) information and assistance services provided under 
     the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
       ``(iv) legal assistance services provided under the Older 
     Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.);
       ``(v) services provided through Senior Medicare Patrol 
     Projects conducted by the Administration on Aging;
       ``(vi) case management services; and
       ``(vii) services provided through Aging and Disability 
     Resource Centers.
       ``(5) Report.--The Secretary shall submit to Congress an 
     annual report on the activities carried out by entities under 
     a grant under this subsection.
       ``(c) National Support Center for Financial Literacy 
     Grant.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary may make a grant to an 
     eligible center to coordinate the services provided through, 
     and support the grant recipients under, the grant program 
     carried out under subsection (b).
       ``(2) Eligible center.--To be eligible to receive a grant 
     under this subsection, a center shall--
       ``(A) be an entity that is housed within an organization 
     described in section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 that is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of 
     such Code;
       ``(B) have a minimum of 10 years experience operating a 
     national program and support center with a focus on financial 
     literacy; and
       ``(C) be primarily engaged in outreach and training 
     activities designed to provide financial education and 
     retirement planning for low- and moderate-income individuals, 
     particularly with respect to women; and
       ``(D) have a demonstrated record of collaboration with 
     organizations that focus on the needs of low- and moderate-
     income individuals and with national organizations serving 
     the elderly, including those working with area agencies on 
     aging and women, as well as organizations with expertise in 
     financial services and related fields.
       ``(3) Use of funds.--A center that receives a grant under 
     this subsection shall use the funds made available through 
     the grant to--
       ``(A) design and conduct training (which may include 
     providing training for trainers) related to financial 
     literacy services;
       ``(B) provide curricula for financial literacy services;
       ``(C) develop and disseminate relevant information about 
     financial literacy services;
       ``(D) conduct outreach to national, State, and community 
     organizations through a series of strategic partnerships in 
     order to improve financial literacy among older individuals 
     and the family members and legal representatives of such 
     individuals;
       ``(E) provide technical assistance to the grant recipients 
     under subsection (b) with respect to the program; and
       ``(F) collect data from such grant recipients about the 
     services provided under this section, and the impact of those 
     services.
       ``(4) Addressing challenges to women in securing adequate 
     retirement income.--In addition to the activities described 
     in paragraph (3), a center that receives a grant under this 
     subsection shall use the funds made available through the 
     grant to conduct activities that are focused on addressing 
     the challenges faced by older women, women of color, single 
     women, and women who are heads of households to securing an 
     adequate retirement income.
       ``(d) Coordination.--The Secretary shall ensure that the 
     activities carried out under the grant program under 
     subsection (b) and under a grant made under subsection (c) 
     are

[[Page S4797]]

     coordinated with the activities carried out by--
       ``(1) the Office of Financial Education of the Department 
     of the Treasury; and
       ``(2) the Financial Literacy and Education Commission 
     established under section 513 of the Financial Literacy and 
     Education Improvement Act (20 U.S.C. 9702).
       ``(e) Funding.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     transfer to the Secretary of Health and Human Services from 
     the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and 
     Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund established under 
     section 201 such funds as are necessary for making grants 
     under this section.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. WYDEN (for himself and Mr. Smith):
  S. 3055. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify 
the rate of the excise tax on certain wooden arrows designed for use by 
children; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today, along with Senator Smith, I am 
introducing a bill to exempt wooden practice arrows from the unfair 
impact of an excise tax designed for much more expensive hunter and 
professional arrows. The JOBS Act of 2004 changed the tax on all arrows 
from 12.4 percent of an arrow's value to a fixed amount, adjusted for 
inflation, that now stands at 39 cents per arrow. Under the prior law, 
wooden practice arrows that cost 30 cents paid a tax of 3.6 cents. 
Under the current fixed tax, the same practice arrows are now assessed 
a tax of 39 cents per arrow, more than doubling the arrows' cost to the 
camps, schools and Boy Scouts that use them. The fixed tax is suited to 
the higher cost of hunter and professional arrows, which sell for up to 
$100 apiece. It is not suited for the less costly practice arrows and 
these should be made exempt as our legislation would do. The Archery 
Trade Association, which represents arrow makers large and small, 
supports this bill and agrees that the newer fixed tax unfairly and 
unintentionally hurts the makers and users of wooden practice arrows. 
Moreover, there is a precedent for exempting practice arrows, because 
Code section 4161 exempts youth bows, defined by their draw weight, 
from taxes. The Joint Committee on Taxation puts the cost of this 
arrows bill as $2 million over 10 years. This seems a small price to 
pay to help wooden arrow manufacturers struggling to stay in business 
in Oregon and 9 other States: Washington, Wisconsin, Arizona, 
Minnesota, Indiana, Virginia, New York, Utah and Texas. I urge my 
colleagues to support reform of the arrow excise tax to help both the 
makers and users of children's wooden practice arrows.
  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. 3055

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

     SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF RATE OF EXCISE TAX ON CERTAIN 
                   WOODEN ARROWS DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 4161(b) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to arrows) is amended 
     by redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C) and by 
     inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(B) Exemption for certain wooden arrow shafts.--
     Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any shaft consisting of 
     all natural wood with no laminations or artificial means of 
     enhancing the spine of such shaft (whether sold separately or 
     incorporated as part of a finished or unfinished product) of 
     a type used in the manufacture of any arrow which after its 
     assembly--
       ``(i) measures \5/16\ of an inch or less in diameter, and
       ``(ii) is not suitable for use with a bow described in 
     paragraph (1)(A).''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to shafts first sold after the date of enactment 
     of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. SMITH (for himself and Mrs. Feinstein):
  S. 3057. A bill to amend title 37, Unite States Code, to provide a 
special displacement allowance for members of the uniformed services 
without dependents, to provide for an annual percentage increase in the 
amount of the family separation allowance for members of the uniformed 
services, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Armed Services.
  Mr SMITH. Mr. President, I rise today to honor our Nation's veterans 
and their families. As we approach Memorial Day and reflect upon the 
countless sacrifices of our service men and women, we must also take a 
moment and remember our military families. These families have 
shouldered the burden of our military engagements, going extended 
periods, sometimes years, without seeing their spouse, their mother, or 
their father. To help alleviate this burden, Senator Feinstein and I 
are introducing the Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act.
  The Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act would peg the 
Family Separation Allowance to the Consumer Price Index, allowing for 
increases in the benefit, providing some additional relief to military 
families separated by deployments. The Family Separation Allowance is a 
benefit awarded to our military families when a service man or woman 
with dependents is deployed overseas for 30 days or more. The current 
amount of the Family Separation Allowance is only $250, which does not 
have much purchasing power in these days of high fuel and food prices. 
The Family Separation Allowance remains at $250, regardless of economic 
conditions.
  When a service member is deployed, a family experiences new and 
unexpected costs. Oftentimes, the deployed service member is a vital 
part of a household, helping to raise children, perform various 
community services and complete chores around the house. Therefore, 
many of our military families are forced to seek additional help. 
Families must pay for extra child care or for a lawn care service, 
tasks that often are the deployed service member's responsibility.
  Pegging the Family Separation Allowance to the Consumer Price Index 
will better reflect the economic burdens our military families 
encounter. The FSA will not be stuck at $250 a month when fuel costs 
are skyrocketing and food prices continue to rise.
  The Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act also creates a 
new Family Separation Allowance for those service members who do not 
have dependents. Just because a service member does not have dependents 
does not mean he or she will not need help at home while overseas. Many 
still need help maintaining their lawn, ensuring the upkeep of their 
house, or providing for the storage of their car.
  Our bill is a means to help our military families and those who 
serve. Deploying overseas is a difficult adjustment for our military 
families and this legislation will provide some relief.
  I ask my colleagues to join Senator Feinstein and me to pass the 
Military Family Separation Benefit Enhancement Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Ms. Snowe):
  S. 3059. A bill to permit commercial trucks to use certain highways 
of the Interstate System to provide significant savings in the 
transportation of goods throughout the United States, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Commercial 
Truck Fuel Savings Demonstration Act of 2008, which would help address 
the growing crisis of energy costs for our Nation's trucking industry.
  Our Nation faces record high energy prices, affecting almost every 
aspect of daily life. The rapidly growing price of diesel is putting an 
increasing strain on our trucking industry. The U.S. average on diesel 
prices reached $3.50 a gallon in February 2008 and prices have not gone 
below this amount since that time. The average price of diesel this 
week is $4.50. Escalating fuel costs are especially devastating in 
states where the cost of diesel fuel is exacerbated by Federal weight 
limit restrictions that prohibit trucks that carry more than 80,000 
pounds from traveling on the Federal interstate system.
  For example, under current law, trucks weighing 100,000 pounds are 
allowed to travel on the portion of Interstate 95 designated as the 
Maine Turnpike, which runs from Maine's border with New Hampshire to 
Augusta, our capital city. At Augusta, the State Turnpike designation 
ends, but I-95 proceeds another 200 miles north to Houlton. At Augusta, 
however, heavy trucks must exit the modern four-lane, limited-access 
highway and are forced

[[Page S4798]]

onto smaller, two-lane secondary roads that pass through cities, towns, 
and villages.
  The Commercial Truck Fuel Savings Demonstration Act of 2008, which I 
am introducing today, will provide immediate savings to our truckers. 
My bill creates a 2-year year pilot program that would permit trucks 
carrying up to 100,000 pounds to travel on the Federal interstate 
system whenever diesel prices are at or above $3.50 a gallon. This 
legislation does not mandate that each state participate in the pilot 
program, but gives each state the opportunity, during this time of high 
fuel costs, to offer relief to their trucking industries.
  Permitting trucks to carry up to 100,000 pounds on Federal highways 
would lessen the fuel cost burden on truckers in three ways: First, 
raising the weight limit would allow trucking companies to put more 
cargo in each truck, thereby reducing the numbers of trucks needed to 
transport goods: Second, trucks carrying up to 100,000 pounds would no 
longer need to move off the main Federal highways where trucks are 
limited at 80,000 pounds and take less direct routes on local roads 
requiring considerably more diesel fuel and extended periods of idling 
during each trip; and third, trucks traveling on the interstate system 
would save on fuel costs due to the much superior road design of the 
interstate system as compared to the rural and urban state road 
systems.
  I recently met with Kurt Babineau, a small business owner and second 
generation logger and trucker from my State who has been struggling 
with the increasing costs of running his operation. Mr. Babineau's 
operation works just east of central Maine on the outskirts of the town 
of Mattawamkeag. All of the pulpwood his business produces, which is 
roughly 50 percent of his total harvest, is transported to Verso Paper, 
which is located in the southwestern part of the State, in the town of 
Jay. The distance his trucks must travel is 165 miles and a round trip 
takes approximately 8 hours to complete.
  If Mr. Babineau's trucks were permitted to use Interstate 95, this 
would reduce the distance his trucks must travel to approximately 100 
miles and would shave one hour off the time it takes his trucks to make 
their delivery to Verso Paper, saving his operation both time and fuel.
  The results of less fuel consumption from decreased distance traveled 
would create significant savings for Mr. Babineau's operation. His 
trucks average 4 miles to the gallon, which calculates to approximately 
11.8 gallons an hour. Permitting trucks to travel on Interstate 95 
would save Mr. Babineau 118 gallons of fuel each week. The current cost 
of diesel fuel in his area is approximately $4.42 per gallon, and 
therefore, combined with time saved on wages for drivers, his savings 
would estimate to nearly $697 a week.
  If you applied this savings to one year of trucking for Mr. 
Babineau's company alone, it would save his operation over $33,400 a 
year and 5,664 gallons of fuel over the same period. These savings are 
not only beneficial to Mr. Babineau's business, his employees, and the 
consumer, but also to our Nation, as we look for ways to decrease on 
our overall fuel consumption.
  Trucking is the cornerstone of our economy as most of our goods are 
transported by trucks at some point in the supply chain. Some 
independent truckers in my state already have been forced out of 
business due to rising fuel costs and more businesses are facing a 
similar fate if Congress does not act soon to address our growing 
energy crisis. The Commercial Truck Fuel Savings Demonstration Act 
offers an immediate and cost effective way to help our Nation's 
struggling trucking industry. I am pleased that Senator Snowe has 
joined me as an original cosponsor of the bill, and I urge all my 
colleagues to support this important legislation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to commend my colleague from 
Maine, Senator Collins, in introducing legislation critical to 
rectifying not only a serious impediment to the movement of 
international commerce, but more importantly, will improve safety on 
our secondary roads and sustain a commercial trucking industry 
suffering from an astonishing rise in diesel prices.
  There are some of our colleagues who believe that expanding upon the 
current Federal truck weight limitation of 80,000 pounds is dangerous, 
compromising the safety of passenger vehicles driver who may be faced 
with a truck weighing as much as 143,000 pounds, the limit on 
Interstates in Massachusetts and New York. I certainly concur that 
safety of such drivers is very important, and I have the record to back 
that up. Yet, in some areas the imposition of this outdated patchwork 
of weight limits puts the safety of pedestrians and the motor carrier 
operators themselves at risk.
  Take the situation we face in Maine, where we currently have a 
limited exemption along the southern portion of the Maine turnpike. 
Many trucks traveling to or from the Canadian border or into upstate 
Maine are not able to travel on our Interstates as a result of the 
80,000 pound weight limit. This forces many of them onto secondary 
roads, many of which are two-lane roads running through small towns and 
villages in Maine. Tanker trucks carrying fuel teeter past elementary 
schools, libraries, and weaving through traffic to reach locations like 
our Air National Guard station. Not only is that an inefficient method 
of bringing necessary fuel to Guardsmen that provide our national 
security, but imagine if you will one of those tanker trucks rupturing 
on Main Street, potentially causing serious damage to property, causing 
traffic chaos, and most importantly, killing or injuring drivers and 
pedestrians.
  This is not a far-fetched scenario. In fact, two pedestrians were 
killed last year in Maine as a result of overweight trucks on local 
roadways, one tragic instance occurring within sight of the nearby 
Interstate. So I ask you, is the so-called safety argument truly a 
legitimate reason for opposition as my constituents and many others 
across small American communities are taking their lives in their hands 
when merely crossing Main Street?
  As laid out in this legislation, it is obvious Senator Collins has a 
clear understanding of this safety issue, crafting a strategy that 
quantifies any potential risks to safety, and places the gathering of 
that data in the hands of the nonpartisan Government Accountability 
Office. It is my expectation that, like earlier studies that have 
indicated traffic fatalities involving trucks weighing 100,000 pounds 
are ten times greater on secondary roads than on exempted Interstates, 
the data collected by the GAO will point the way to a permanent 
solution that will enable America to harmonize the myriad weight limits 
across our Nation's highways.
  This legislation also exhibits a true sensitivity to one of the 
greatest problems facing the domestic trucking industry, particularly 
our smaller operators: the cost of fuel. This is a problem that cannot 
be ignored. The price of diesel nationally as I make this statement is 
four dollars and 49 cents. One year ago today, it was two dollars and 
82 cents! We must act.
  As a result of this legislation, motor carriers will be able to 
expand their ability to carry loads when the price of diesel surpasses 
three dollars and fifty cents per gallon. While this will only affect 
some states that face a federal interstate system without a weight 
exemption, it will greatly facilitate the movement of goods across this 
country. Given that volume of goods projected to enter this country is 
forecast to increase by over 100 percent, we need a forward-thinking, 
intermodal plan in place. Having a greater synergy in terms of our 
weight limits will not only assist our Nation's struggling trucking 
industry, but will simplify the flow of goods moving across our country 
and augment our Nation's economy.
  I would like to thank Senator Collins for her steadfast efforts and 
innovative thinking on this legislation as, side-by-side, we will 
continue to seek a resolution to this issue, which, to my eyes, is a 
simple matter of fairness.
                                 F_____
                                 
      By Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Brownback):
  S. 3061. A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2008 
through 2011 for the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, to 
enhance measures to combat trafficking in persons, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the William 
Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection

[[Page S4799]]

Reauthorization Act of 2008. The Trafficking Victims Protection Act was 
authored 8 years ago by Senator Brownback and the late Senator 
Wellstone, and since then, through two re-authorizations, has been a 
tremendous asset in preventing and prosecuting human trafficking 
crimes. Today, I am honored to be able to introduce legislation to 
reauthorize these valuable programs with my distinguished colleague, 
Senator Brownback.
  Human trafficking is a major problem worldwide and the challenges 
remain great. According to the most recent State Department report, 
roughly 800,000 individuals are trafficked each year, the overwhelming 
majority of them women and children. The FBI estimates approximately 
$9.5 billion is generated annually for organized crime from trafficking 
in persons. The International Labor Organization estimates that, at 
present, 2.4 million persons have been trafficked into situations of 
forced labor.
  These victims are trafficked in a variety of ways. Sometimes they are 
kidnapped outright, but many times they are lured with dubious job 
offers, or false marriage opportunities. The traffickers capitalize on 
the victims' desire to seek a better life, and trap them with lifetime 
debt bondages that degrade and destroy their lives.
  Since 2000, the Trafficking Victims Protection Act has provided us 
effective tools, and in this reauthorization, our aim is to take the 
successes and lessons of eight years of progress and expand our 
abilities to combat human trafficking. In Title I, the legislation 
focuses on combating human trafficking internationally by broadening 
the U.S. interagency task force charged with monitoring and combating 
trafficking, and increasing the authority to the State Department 
Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking. Because of the difficulty in 
accurately understanding the full scope of the problem globally, we 
also include provisions to coordinate our multiple federal databases, 
and set a reporting requirement to address forced labor and child 
labor.
  Today's reauthorization bill also expands our ability to combat 
trafficking in the United States. We've provided for certain 
improvements to the T-visa program, which protects trafficking victims 
and their families from retaliation, so that we can have their help in 
bringing traffickers to justice, without the victim fearing harm to 
themselves or their loved ones. We also expand authority for U.S. 
Government programs to help those who have been trafficked, and require 
a study to outline any additional gaps in assistance that may exist. 
Finally, we establish some powerful new legal tools, including 
increasing the jurisdiction of the courts, enhancing penalties for 
trafficking offenses, punishing those who profit from trafficked labor 
and ensuring restitution of forfeited assets to victims.
  Human trafficking is a daunting and critical global issue. I urge my 
colleagues to support this reauthorization and work with Senator 
Brownback and me to pass it in the Senate as quickly as possible.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a section-by-section 
summary of the bill be printed in the Record.

William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act 
                                of 2008


                     Section-by-Section Description

     Section 1. Short title; table of contents

        TITLE I--COMBATING INTERNATIONAL TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS

     Section 101. Interagency task force to monitor and combat 
         trafficking
       Section 101 adds the Secretary of Education to the existing 
     interagency task force to monitor and combat trafficking.
     Section 102. Office to monitor and combat trafficking
       Section 102 provides for several amendments to Section 
     105(b) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) 
     related to the State Department's Office to Monitor and 
     Combat Trafficking (the TIP Office) including mandating the 
     office, conferring additional responsibility to the Director 
     to work on public-private partnerships to combat trafficking 
     and providing that the Director of the office have the 
     ability to review and concur in State Department anti-
     trafficking programs that are not managed by the Office to 
     Monitor and Combat Trafficking (TIP Office).
     Section 103. Assistance for victims of trafficking in other 
         countries
       Section 103 amends section 107(a) of the TVPA, including 
     ensuring that programs take into account the transnational 
     aspects of trafficking, support increased protection for 
     refugees, internally displaced persons and trafficked 
     children and emphasize cooperative, regional efforts.
     Section 104. Increasing effectiveness of anti-trafficking 
         programs
       Section 104 creates a new section to the TVPA to increase 
     the effectiveness of anti-trafficking programs by providing 
     that solicitation of grants be made publicly available and 
     awarded by a transparent process with a review panel of 
     Federal and private sector experts, when appropriate. The 
     provision provides a mandated evaluation system for anti-
     trafficking programs on a program-by-program basis. It 
     requires that priorities and country assessments contained in 
     the most recent annual Report on Human Trafficking shall 
     guide grant priorities. It provides that not more than 5 
     percent of the appropriations may be used for evaluations of 
     specific programs or for evaluations of emerging problems or 
     trends in the field of human trafficking.
     Section 105. Minimum standards for the elimination of 
         trafficking
       Section 105 amends section 108(b) of the TVPA by clarifying 
     that in evaluating whether a country's anti-trafficking 
     efforts convictions of principal actors that result in 
     suspended or significantly reduced sentences shall be 
     considered on a case-by-case basis.
     Section 106. Actions against governments failing to meet 
         minimum standards
       Section 106 amends Section 110 of the TVPA by providing 
     that if a country has been on the special watch list for 
     three consecutive years, such country shall be deemed to be 
     not making significant efforts to combat trafficking and 
     shall be included in the list of countries described in 
     paragraph (1)(C). The subsection includes a Presidential 
     waiver for up to one year if it would promote the purposes of 
     the act or is in the national interest of the United States.
     Section 107. Research on domestic and international 
         trafficking in persons
       Section 107 amends section 112A of the TVPA by requiring 
     the establishment and maintenance of an integrated database 
     within the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center, details 
     the purposes of the database, and authorizes $3 million 
     annually to the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center to 
     carry out these activities.
     Section 108. Presidential award for extraordinary efforts to 
         combat trafficking in persons
       Section 108 authorizes the President to establish a ``Paul 
     D. Wellstone Presidential Award for Extraordinary Efforts to 
     Combat Trafficking in Persons'' for persons who provided 
     extraordinary service in efforts to combat trafficking in 
     persons.
     Section 109. Report on activities of the department of labor 
         to monitor and combat forced labor and child labor
       Section 109 requires that the Secretary of Labor provide a 
     final report that describes the implementation of section 105 
     of the TVPRA of 2005, including a list of imported goods made 
     with forced and/or child labor.

    TITLE II--COMBATING TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS IN THE UNITED STATES

 Subtitle A--Ensuring Availability of Possible Witnesses and Informants

     Section 201. Protecting trafficking victims against 
         retaliation
       Subsection (a) of Section 201 amends section 101(1)(15)(T) 
     of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to provide for 
     certain changes to the T visa for trafficking victims. 
     Paragraph (1) allows persons who are brought into the 
     country,for investigations or as witnesses to apply for such 
     a visa. It also allows a T visa for persons who are not able 
     to assist law enforcement because of the physical or 
     psychological trauma; it also clarifies the existing language 
     in the T Visa authorization and eliminates the ``unusual and 
     severe harm'' standard.
       Paragraph (2) allows parents and siblings who are in danger 
     of retaliation to join the trafficking victims safely in the 
     United States. Subsection (b) modifies certain requirements 
     of the T Visa contained in section 214(o) of the INA, 
     including allowing 2 the extension of time for a T Visa in 
     exceptional circumstances and providing that the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security may look at certain security and 
     other conditions in the applicant's home country in making 
     the determination that extreme hardship exists.
       Subsection (d) provides for certain changes to section 
     245(1) of the INA relating to adjustment of status of T visa 
     holders, including providing that the Secretary of Homeland 
     Security may waive the restriction on disqualification for 
     good moral character for T visa holders applying for 
     permanent residence alien status if the actions that would 
     have led to the disqualification are caused by or incident to 
     the trafficking.
     Section 202. Information for work-based non-immigrants on 
         legal rights and resources
       Section 202 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
     create an information pamphlet for work-based non-immigrant 
     visa applications. The pamphlet will detail the illegality of 
     human trafficking and reiterate worker rights and information 
     for related services.
     Section 203. Domestic worker protections
       Section 203 sets forth new protections for trafficked 
     domestic household workers and preventative measures to be 
     followed by the State Department. Subsection (b) states that

[[Page S4800]]

     the Secretary of State shall develop an information pamphlet 
     for A-3 and G5 visa applicants and describes the required 
     information to be included in the pamphlets. It mandates that 
     the pamphlets be translated into at least ten languages and 
     mailed to each A-3 or G-5 visa applicant in his/her primary 
     language.
       Subsection (c) provides the circumstances in which the 
     Secretary may suspend a visa or renew a visa, as well as when 
     the Secretary is not permitted to issue a visa.
       Subsection (d) provides the protections and remedies for A-
     3 and G-5 visa holders working in the United States.
       Subsection (e) ensures protection from removal for visa 
     holders wanting to file a complaint regarding a violation of 
     contract or some Federal, State, or local law to allow time 
     sufficient to participate fully in all legal proceedings.
       Subsection (f) requires that every two years the Secretary 
     of State shall submit a report on the implementation of this 
     section and describes the necessary content of the report.
     Section 204. Relief for certain victims pending actions on 
         petitions and applications for relief
       Section 204 allows the Secretary of Homeland Security to 
     stay the removal of an individual which has made a prima case 
     for approval of a T Visa.
     Section 205. Expansion of authority to permit continued 
         presence in the United States
       Section 205 expands the authority to permit the Secretary 
     of Homeland Security to permit continued presence of 
     trafficking victims, including if the alien has filed a civil 
     action against the trafficking perpetrators (unless the alien 
     is not showing due diligence in pursuing his civil action). 
     It also allows for parole into the United States of certain 
     relatives of trafficking victims with several limitations.
     Section 206. Implementation of trafficking victims protection 
         reauthorization act of 2005
       Section 206 amends the Immigration and Nationality act and 
     requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue interim 
     regulations on the adjustment of status to permanent 
     residence for T Visa holders.

             Subtitle B--Assistance for Trafficking Victims

     Section 211. Assistance for certain nonimmigrant status 
         applicants
       Section 211 clarifies that T-visa applicants have access to 
     certain public benefits.
     Section 212. Interim assistance for child victims of 
         trafficking
       Subsection (a) of Section 212 provides that if credible 
     information is presented that a child has been a trafficking 
     victim, the Secretary of HHS may provide interim assistance 
     to the child for up to 90 days. Subsection (a) also provides 
     that any federal official must notify HHS within 48 hours of 
     coming into contact with such child and that State or local 
     officials must notify HHS within 48 hours of coming into 
     contact with such a child. Long term assistance 
     determinations are to be made by the Secretary of HHS, the 
     Attorney General and the Secretary of Department of Homeland 
     Security.
       Subsection (b) provides for education on identification of 
     trafficking victims.
     Section 213. Ensuring assistance for all victims of 
         trafficking in persons
       Subsection (a) of Section 213 amends the TVPA of 2000 to 
     specifically authorize an assistance program for victims of 
     severe forms of trafficking of persons and provides for 
     establishing a system that refers such victims to existing 
     programs at the Department of Health and Human Services and 
     the Department of Justice.
       Subsection (b) requires a study on the gaps for assistance 
     to women in prostitution victimized under chapter 117 of 
     title 18.

       Subtitle C--Penalties Against Traffickers and Other Crimes

     Section 221. Restitution of forfeited assets; enhancement of 
         civil action
       Section 221 amends chapter 77 of title 18 by allowing the 
     Attorney General in a prosecution brought under Federal law 
     to grant restoration or remission of property to victims of 
     severe forms of trafficking.
     Section 222. Enhancing trafficking offenses
       Section 222 amends title 18 of the U.S. Code to enhance 
     existing penalties for trafficking offenses. Subsection (a) 
     permits pretrial detention for trafficking offenders. 
     Subsection (b) ensures that obstruction or attempts to 
     obstruct or in any way interfere with enforcement of the 
     trafficking statutes is a separate offense. Subsection (c) 
     ensures that trafficking conspirators are punished as 
     though they had completed a violation. Subsection (d) 
     amends the trafficking statutes to hold accountable those 
     who knowingly or in reckless disregard financially benefit 
     from participation in a trafficking venture; it also 
     amends the forced labor and sex trafficking statutes to 
     clarify the definition of ``harm'' and ``abuse of the law 
     or legal process.'' Subsection (e) tightens the 
     immigration law to ensure that committing or conspiring to 
     commit trafficking offenses are grounds of inadmissibility 
     and removability. The provision also creates a new crime 
     of sex tourism that punishes individuals who go abroad for 
     sex tourism and sex tour operators that benefit from such 
     promoting such travel.
     Section 223. Jurisdiction in certain trafficking offenses
       Section 223 amends chapter 77 of title 18 by increasing the 
     jurisdiction of the courts to include any trafficking case 
     found in or brought into the United States, even if the 
     conduct occurred in a different country, as long as no more 
     than ten years have passed.

         Subtitle D--Activities of the United States Government

     Section 231. Annual report by the Attorney General
       Section 231 requires that the annual report by the Attorney 
     General include activities by the Department of Defense to 
     combat trafficking in persons, actions taken to enforce 
     policies relating to contractors and their employees, actions 
     by the Secretary of Homeland Security to waive restrictions 
     on section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930, and prohibitions on 
     procurement of items or services produced by slave labor.
     Section 232. Defense Contract Audit Agency audit
       Section 232 requires the Defense Contract Audit Agency to 
     conduct an audit of all Department of Defense contractors and 
     subcontractors where there is substantial evidence to suggest 
     trafficking in persons, notify congress of the findings of 
     each audit, and certify that the contractor is no longer 
     engaging in such activities.
     Section 233. Senior policy operating group
       Section 233 amends section 206 of the TVPRA of 2005 to 
     ensure that the Senior Policy Operating Group reviews all 
     anti-trafficking programs.
     Section 234. Preventing United States travel by traffickers
       Section 234 provides that the Secretary of State may 
     prohibit the entry into the United States of traffickers.
     Section 235. Enhancing efforts to combat the trafficking of 
         children
       Section 235 sets forth comprehensive protections for child 
     victims of trafficking and other unaccompanied alien 
     children, including the following the provisions: (1) Care 
     and Custody of Unaccompanied Children: Care and custody of 
     all unaccompanied alien children shall be the responsibility 
     of Health and Human Services; (2) Transfer of Custody: 
     Consistent with the Homeland Security Act of 2002, requires 
     all departments or agencies of the federal government to 
     notify the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 
     within 48 hours. The custody of most unaccompanied alien 
     children encountered by immigration authorities must be 
     transferred to the Secretary of Health and Human Services 
     within 72 hours with special rules for children who have 
     committed crimes or threaten national security; (3) Special 
     Repatriation Procedures and Safeguards for Mexican and 
     Canadian Nationals: Permits the Department of Homeland 
     Security to repatriate promptly certain unaccompanied alien 
     children from Canada or Mexico apprehended provided that 
     those Canadian and Mexican unaccompanied alien children who 
     are victims of severe forms of trafficking or have a fear of 
     persecution; (4) Safe and Secure Placements: An unaccompanied 
     alien child in the custody of HHS shall be placed in the 
     least restrictive setting that is in the best interests of 
     the child. Placement of child trafficking victims may include 
     placement with competent adult victims of the same 
     trafficking scheme in order to ensure continuity of support; 
     (5) Standards for Placement: An unaccompanied child may not 
     be placed with a person or entity unless HHS makes a 
     determination that the proposed custodian is capable of 
     providing for the child; (5) Representation: All 
     unaccompanied alien children who are or have been in 
     government custody, must have competent counsel to represent 
     them in legal proceedings or matters and protect them from 
     mistreatment, exploitation, and trafficking; (6) Special 
     Immigrant Juvenile Status: Revises procedures for obtaining 
     special immigrant juvenile status provided for under the 
     Immigration and Nationality Act.
     Section 236. Temporary increase in fee for certain consular 
         services
       Section 236 allows the Secretary of State to increase the 
     fee for processing machine readable non-immigrant visas by 
     two dollars. This increase shall be deposited in the Treasury 
     and will terminate two years following the initial increase.

               TITLE III--AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS

       This title and the sections within it provide authorization 
     of appropriations for various trafficking programs.

         TITLE IV--CHILD SOLDIERS PREVENTION AND ACCOUNTABILITY

     Section 401. Short title
       Section 401 provides that this title may be referred to as 
     the ``Child Soldier Prevention and Accountability Act of 
     2008''.
     Section 402. Definitions
       Section 402 provides for various definitions used 
     throughout the Act.
     Section 403. Prohibition
       Subsection (a) of Section 403 prohibits military 
     assistance, the transfer of excess defense articles, or 
     licenses for direct sales of military equipment to 
     governments that the State Department's annual human rights 
     report indicates have governmental armed forces or 
     government-supported armed forces, including paramilitaries, 
     militias or civil defense forces that recruit or use child 
     soldiers.

[[Page S4801]]

       Subsection (b) provides that the Secretary of State 
     formally notify any government of such prohibitions.
       Subsection (c) provides that the President may waive the 
     restriction in subsection (a) if doing so is in the national 
     interest of the United States. The President must publish 
     each waiver granted, and its justification, within 45 
     calendar days.
       Subsection (d) provides that the President may reinstate 
     assistance which is restricted if the Government has 
     implemented measures to come into compliance with this title 
     and has implemented policies to prohibit and prevent future 
     governmentsupported use of child soldiers.
       Subsection (e) provides that notwithstanding the 
     restriction in subsection (a), assistance for international 
     military education and training and nonlethal supplies may be 
     provided for up to two years s/he certifies that the 
     government of that country is taking steps to implement 
     effective measures to demobilize child soldiers and the 
     assistance is provided to directly support 
     professionalization of the military.
     Section 404. Reports
       Subsection (a) of Section 404 provides that the Secretary 
     of State and U.S. missions abroad thoroughly investigate 
     reports of the use of child soldiers.
       Subsection (b) clarifies that the Secretary of State, in 
     the annual Human Rights Report, must include a description of 
     the use of child soldiers, including trends toward 
     improvement or the continued or increased tolerance of such 
     practices and the role of the government in engaging in or 
     tolerating the use of child soldiers.
       Subsection (c) requires that the President submit an annual 
     report to the appropriate congressional committees that 
     contains a list of countries in violation of standards under 
     this subtitle, a list of any waivers or exceptions, 
     justification for any such waivers and exceptions, and a 
     description of any assistance provided under this subtitle.
       Subsection (d) provides that not less than 180 days after 
     implementation of the Act, the Secretaries of State and 
     Defense shall submit a strategy and a coordination plan for 
     achieving the policy objectives described in this Act.
     Section 405. Training for foreign service officers
       Section 405 establishes a requirement for training relevant 
     Foreign Service officers in the assessment of child soldier 
     use and other matters related to child soldiers.
     Section 406. Effective date; Applicability
       Section 406 states that the amendments made under this 
     section shall take effect 180 days after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
     Sec. 407. Accountability for the recruitment and use of child 
         soldiers
       Subsection (a)(l) of Section 407 amends chapter 118 of 
     title 18 by adding the offense of recruiting persons less 
     than 15 years of age into an armed force or knowingly using a 
     person under 15 in hostilities, and provides for terms of 
     imprisonment. This subsection also provides that anyone 
     attempting or conspiring to commit an offense under this 
     section shall be punished in the same manner as someone who 
     completes the offense, establishes the jurisdiction of the 
     code, and provides for definitions used in this section.
       Subsection (a)(2) establishes a statute of limitations of 
     10 years for prosecution under this code.
       Subsection (b) makes participation in recruiting or using 
     child soldiers grounds for inadmissibility or deportation 
     under U.S. immigration law.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. ALLARD:
  S. 3062. A bill to amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to modify 
certain provisions relating to oil shale leasing; to the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, this weekend is the unofficial beginning 
of summer and the start of the summer driving season. This is as oil 
hits $135 per barrel and more and more cities and towns all over the 
country are seeing gasoline prices over $4 per gallon. In the face of 
these challenges to the American economy and consumer, we have failed 
to take the steps that are necessary to address this problem either in 
the short term or the long term.
  Last week, the House and Senate voted to suspend filling the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. I voted against that effort as many on the 
other side hailed it as a major move that would help to alleviate 
``pain at the pump.'' Instead, oil prices have continued to increase 
every day since that measure passed. I think this demonstrates that 
adding a mere 70,000 barrels a day to the marketplace means little when 
we consume 21 million barrels of oil per day in this country alone.
  Oil shale can be a major part of addressing rising oil prices by 
potentially bringing over 1 trillion barrels of oil to the domestic 
market. There are enormous oil shale reserves located in Colorado, 
Wyoming, and Utah. Oil shale is energy we can develop here at home to 
lower gas prices, increase our Nation's security, and improve our 
balance of trade by keeping money and investment in the United States 
rather than sending hundreds of billions of dollars overseas--
frequently to governments, I might add, that are unstable or whose 
interests are counter to those of this country. It will also bring in 
billions of dollars to the States and the Federal Treasury in the form 
of future royalties.
  This bill is necessary because the fiscal year 2008 Interior, 
Environment, and Related Agencies bill has language prohibiting funds 
from being used by the Department of the Interior to prepare final 
regulations and will set forth the requirements for a commercial 
leasing program for oil shale resources or to conduct an oil shale 
lease sale as provided in the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Without 
removing this moratorium--and it is a moratorium--companies will not 
know the rules of the road so they can make investment decisions, 
things such as what the length of the oil shale leases will be, the 
royalty rate, and reclamation and bonding requirements.
  I have a letter from the Assistant Secretary for Lands and Minerals 
at the Department of the Interior, Stephen Allred, dated May 14 in 
support of removing the prohibition contained in last year's Interior 
bill on the Department of the Interior issuing oil shale regulations. I 
ask unanimous consent at this time to have the letter printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                       Department of the Interior,


                                      Office of the Secretary,

                                                   Washington, DC.
     Hon. Wayne Allard,
     Ranking Minority, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and 
         Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. 
         Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Allard: Section 433 of the FY 2008 Interior, 
     Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act prohibits 
     our Department from issuing regulations related to oil shale 
     leasing. This letter is to communicate our opposition to this 
     prohibition and to urge its removal, so that the 
     Administration can move forward and issue regulations.
       As you know, in Section 369 of the Energy Policy Act of 
     2005, the Congress directed the Department to take the steps 
     necessary to meet future requests for a commercial oil shale 
     leasing program on Federal lands. In 2007, the Bureau of Land 
     Management authorized six oil shale research, development, 
     and demonstration projects on public lands in northwestern 
     Colorado and northeastern Utah. These projects provide 
     industry access to oil shale resources to further their 
     development of oil shale technologies.
       This type of research will require significant private 
     capital, with an uncertain return on this investment in the 
     immediate future. Part of the wisdom of Section 369 is that 
     it envisions the private sector will lead this investment--
     not the American taxpayer. However, for these projects to be 
     successful, companies will require a level playing field and 
     a clear set of regulations or ``rules of the road.'' 
     Developing a regulatory framework now will aid in 
     facilitating a producing program in the future should oil 
     shale development prove to be economic. Impeding the Federal 
     Government's efforts at this stage could have serious 
     consequences.
       Moving forward with these regulations does not mean 
     commercial oil shale production will take place immediately. 
     To the contrary, with thoughtfully developed regulations, 
     thoroughly vetted through a public process, we have only set 
     the groundwork for the future commercial development of this 
     resource in an environmentally sound manner. With the 
     administrative and regulatory certainty that regulations will 
     provide, energy companies will be encouraged to commit the 
     financial resources needed to fund their RD&D projects, and 
     the development of viable technology will continue to 
     advance. Actual commercial development and production will be 
     dependent upon the results of the RD&D efforts and more site-
     specific environmental evaluations.
       Consistent with the language in the Consolidated 
     Appropriations Act for FY 2008, the BLM is not spending FY 
     2008 funds to develop and publish final oil shale 
     regulations; however, the agency is moving forward in a 
     thoughtful, deliberative manner to publish proposed 
     regulations on oil shale. These proposed regulations will 
     reflect input already received from our partners in the 
     states. The publication of the draft regulations will provide 
     an opportunity for the public and interested parties to 
     remain engaged on this important issue.
       Given the Nation's projected future energy needs, it is 
     incumbent on us to promote the development of oil shale for 
     our national security and energy security. Declining domestic 
     oil production and rising U.S. demand for oil increase the 
     Nation's dependence on imports, and leave us vulnerable to 
     rising energy costs. Households across America are struggling 
     to deal with these additional costs and experts predict that 
     the trend is

[[Page S4802]]

     set to continue. In looking beyond traditional energy 
     resources to unconventional and alternative fuels, the 
     Department of the Interior has a key role to play in the 
     development of oil shale.
       I ask for your support for removal of the prohibition on 
     issuing oil shale regulations in order that we may move 
     forward with the public process of finalizing regulations for 
     commercial oil shale development on Federal lands. I commit 
     to working closely with the Congress throughout the 
     development of this program.
       A similar letter has been sent to the Honorable Dianne 
     Feinstein, Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, 
     and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, United 
     States Senate, the Honorable Norman D. Dicks, Chairman, 
     Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, 
     Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives, and 
     the Honorable Todd Tiahrt, Ranking Minority Member, 
     Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, 
     Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives.
           Sincerely,

                                            C. Stephen Allred,

                                              Assistant Secretary,
                                     Land and Minerals Management.

  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, Allred points out that issuing these 
regulations is critical to providing regulatory certainty for these oil 
shale projects to go forward. With the regulatory certainty these 
regulations will provide, companies will have an incentive to commit 
the resources necessary to develop this technology.
  I also have a letter from Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne 
dated December 12, 2007, objecting to the inclusion of this moratorium 
that was in the House version of the fiscal year 2008 Interior 
appropriations. I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in 
the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                The Secretary of the Interior,

                                Washington, DC, December 12, 2007.
     Hon. Wayne Allard,
     Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment and 
         Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. 
         Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Allard: As the House and Senate consider the 
     Fiscal Year 2008 Interior, Environment and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations bill, I would like to voice my concern 
     regarding efforts to prohibit our Department from issuing 
     regulations related to oil shale leasing.
       Section 606 of the House-passed Interior appropriations 
     bill would prohibit the use of funds to prepare or publish 
     final regulations regarding a commercial leasing program for 
     oil shale resources on public lands. The Energy Policy Act of 
     2005 (EPAct) was enacted with broad bipartisan support. The 
     EPAct included substantive and significant authorities for 
     the development of alternative and emerging energy sources.
       Oil shale is one important potential energy source. The 
     United States holds significant oil shale resources, the 
     largest known concentration of oil shale in the world, and 
     the energy equivalent of 2.6 trillion barrels of oil. Even if 
     only a portion were recoverable, that source could be 
     important in the future as energy demands increase worldwide 
     and the competition for energy resources increases.
       The Energy Policy Act sets the timeframe for program 
     development, including the completion of final regulations. 
     The Department must be able to prepare final regulations in 
     FY 2008 in order to meet the statutorily-imposed schedule.
       The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) issued a draft 
     Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in August 2007. The 
     final EIS is scheduled for release in May 2008 and the 
     effective date of the final rule is anticipated in November 
     2008. The final regulations will consider all pertinent 
     components of the final EIS. Throughout this process BLM will 
     seek public input and work closely with the States and other 
     stakeholders to ensure that concerns are adequately 
     addressed. The Department is willing to consider an extended 
     comment period after the publication of the draft regulations 
     in order to assure that all of the stakeholders have adequate 
     time and opportunity to review and comment before publication 
     of the final regulations.
       The successful development of economically viable and 
     environmentally responsible oil shale extraction technology 
     requires significant capital investments and substantial 
     commitments of time and expertise by those undertaking this 
     important research. Our Nation relies on private investment 
     to develop new energy technologies such as this one. Even 
     though commercial leasing is not anticipated until after 
     2010, it is vitally important that private investors know 
     what will be expected of them regarding the development of 
     this resource. The regulations that Section 606 would 
     disallow represent the critical ``rules of the road'' upon 
     which private investors will rely in determining whether to 
     make future financial commitments. Accordingly, any delay or 
     failure to publish these regulations in a timely manner is 
     likely to discourage continued private investment in these 
     vital research and development efforts.
       The Administration opposes the House provision that would 
     prohibit the Department from completing its oil shale 
     regulations. I would urge the Congress to let the 
     administrative process work. It is premature to impose 
     restrictions on the development of oil shale regulations 
     before the public has had an opportunity to provide input.
       Identical letters are being sent to Congressman Norm Dicks, 
     Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related 
     Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, House of 
     Representatives; Congressman Todd Tiahrt, Subcommittee on 
     Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, Committee on 
     Appropriations, House of Representatives; and Senator Dianne 
     Feinstein, Chairman, Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, 
     and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, United 
     States Senate.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Dirk Kempthorne.

  Mr. ALLARD. Mr. President, Secretary Kempthorne also indicates the 
critical nature of allowing the Department to issue these regulations 
in order to attract the private investment necessary to develop the oil 
shale resource.
  Let me emphasize that this is not an environmental issue. No 
commercial lease sales are permitted under the provisions of this bill. 
In fact, commercial oil shale leases are banned for 2\1/2\ years 
because the technology for oil shale extraction is not yet economically 
viable on a wide scale. But, as I have said, the companies that 
invested tens of millions of dollars in this technology already need to 
have the Department of Interior issue the leasing ground rules so that 
they know what their costs will be for taking part in the Federal 
commercial leasing program when the time for leasing comes.
  My bill also makes sure there is adequate public comment by requiring 
that final regulations not be issued for at least 90 days after they 
have been published in draft form.
  When I offered this as an amendment in the Appropriations Committee, 
it was defeated by one vote and strictly along party lines. I heard 
from the other side of the aisle that because the Governor of Colorado 
and the junior Senator from Colorado opposed lifting this moratorium, 
Congress should not do so. I find this curious and incredibly 
inconsistent with prior debates over public lands policy. When we have 
debated drilling in the section 1002 area of ANWR, the other side seems 
to have little or no regard for the desires of Alaska's Governor, the 
people of the State of Alaska, or the entire congressional delegation 
about how they want their public lands managed.
  On this side of the aisle--that is, the Republican side of the 
aisle--we have offered proposals to bring to market billions of barrels 
of domestic supply that are continually blocked. If we don't begin to 
put in place policies to enhance our domestic production, prices are 
only going to go higher and the American people are going to pay the 
price at the pump as well as suffer the consequences of a further drag 
on the economy.
  In closing, I wish to state that increasing domestic energy 
production, including from oil shale, will strengthen this country's 
national security, lower gas prices, keep jobs and investments right 
here at home, and, in these tight budgetary times, bring in hundreds of 
billions of dollars to the States and the Federal Treasury through 
royalty collections.
  Congress needs to take a good, hard look at what it has done as far 
as encouraging further supply of energy for this country. As was 
mentioned in a number of editorials that have shown up in the papers, 
it is easy to blame companies and the stock market, and it is easy to 
blame the futures market, but really the problem starts right here in 
the Congress. The Congress needs to come up with a solution to relieve 
the inadequate supply of oil and gas. If that solution is not arrived 
at soon, Americans are going to be put out of business. We already hear 
about airlines having to cut back on the number of employees they have 
because of the high cost of gasoline. So it is going to have a dramatic 
impact on the economy of this country.
  Just think about how much land we have tied up because of previous 
action by this Congress--the billions of barrels of oil that 
potentially would be available in ANWR; the huge amount of reserves 
that we think is in the deep-sea portions that would be available off 
the coast of this country. We

[[Page S4803]]

are the only country in the world that restricts drilling out in the 
deep sea. There are potential reserves that would be available for 
consumers of this country with oil shale in Utah and Colorado and 
Wyoming. Now we have that tied up with a strict moratorium that tells 
the oil producers of this country: We want you to shut down. We don't 
want you to be able to move forward.
  I think these are huge reserves, and if we had acted, actually, 10 
years ago, we wouldn't now have a problem. We are going to have a 
problem for the next 10 years unless we do something quickly and 
drastically, and we need to do something more than just saying that the 
Strategic Oil Reserve can't purchase oil for 6 months or we wait until 
it drops to less than $75 a barrel.
  I am calling on my colleagues to join us because this is a serious 
problem we are facing in this country, and the Congress needs to do 
something about it.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Cardin, and Mr. 
        Smith):
  S. 3063. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 
for S corporation reform, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am very pleased to rise today to 
introduce the S Corporation Modernization Act of 2008 with my good 
friend, Senator Orrin Hatch. I also want to say a special thanks to our 
cosponsors, Senators Gordon Smith of Oregon and Ben Cardin of Maryland. 
This legislation makes needed changes to the tax code to help small and 
family-owned businesses across this Nation. It is my hope that these 
policy changes will provide them the opportunity to grow their 
businesses, create jobs and stimulate the economy.
  In my home State of Arkansas, as in so many rural States across the 
country, the vast majority of our businesse are small businesses. They 
are the local insurance agency, the flower shop, the coffee shop--and 
they are most often organized as so-called ``S corporations.'' In fact, 
our country has more than four million S corporations nationwide. These 
businesses and their employees are truly the engines of our rural 
economies. We must do all we can to ensure they can continue to compete 
in a global economy that is becoming steadily more competitive.
  Because Congress has not updated many of the rules governing S 
corporations--such as allowing better access to capital--I am concerned 
that these privately-held businesses are not in the best position to 
deal with the current downturn in the economy. We must modify our 
outdated rules so that these businesses that are starved for capital 
have the means to expand and create jobs. Current law--particularly the 
punitive built-in gains tax penalty--not only limits the ability of S 
corporations to attract new equity investors, but also effectively 
forces businesses to sit on `locked-up' capital that they cannot access 
and put to use to grow their business.
  The S Corporation Modernization Act would update and simplify our S 
corporation tax rules. It increases access to capital, encourages 
family-owned businesses to stay in the family, eliminates tax traps 
that penalize unwary but well-meaning business owners, and encourages 
charitable giving.
  A strong economic recovery will depend on the health and strength of 
our small business sector--our S corporations. It is absolutely 
imperative that we work to ensure our tax rules that govern this sector 
are fair, simple and encourage growth. I look forward to working with 
my colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee to ensure these important 
changes are made.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. COLLINS (for herself, Mr. Feingold, and Mr. Cardin):
  S. 3067. A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize 
the Dental Health Improvement Act; to the Committee on Health, 
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am pleased to join my colleagues from 
Wisconsin and Maryland in introducing legislation to reauthorize the 
Collins-Feingold Dental Health Improvement Act, which was first signed 
into law as part of the Health Care Safety Net Act Amendments of 2002. 
The legislation we are introducing today will extend the authorization 
of this program, which provides grant funding to States to strengthen 
the dental workforce in our Nation's rural and underserved communities, 
for an additional 5 years.
  While oral health in America has improved dramatically over the last 
50 years, these improvements have not occurred evenly across our 
population, particularly among low-income individuals and families. Too 
many Americans today lack access to dental care. While there are 
clinically proven techniques to prevent or delay the progression of 
dental health problems, an estimated 47 million Americans live in areas 
lacking adequate dental services. As a consequence, these effective 
treatment and prevention programs are not being implemented in many of 
our communities. Astoundingly, as many as 11 percent of our Nation's 
rural population has never been to a dentist.
  The situation is exacerbated by the fact that our dental workforce is 
graying. More than 20 percent of dentists nationwide will retire in the 
next 10 years, and the number of dental graduates may not be enough to 
replace their retirees. As a consequence, many states are facing a 
serious shortage of dentists, particularly in rural areas.
  In Maine, there is one general practice dentist for every 2,300 
people in the Portland area. The numbers drop off dramatically, 
however, in other parts of our state. In Aroostook County, for example, 
where I am from, there is only one dentist for every 5,500 people. Of 
the 23 dentists practicing in Aroostook County, only a few are taking 
on any new cases.
  The Collins-Feingold Dental Health Improvement Act, which is now 
Section 340G of the Public Health Service Act, authorized a State grant 
program administered by the Health Resources and Services 
Administration at the Department of Health and Human services that is 
designed to improve access to oral health services in rural and 
underserved areas. States can use these grants to fund a wide variety 
of programs. For example, they can use the funds for loan forgiveness 
and repayment programs for dentists practicing in underserved areas. 
They can also use the grant funds to establish or expand community or 
school-based dental facilities or to set up mobile or portable dental 
clinics. To assist in their recruitment and retention efforts, States 
can use the funds for placement and support of dental students, 
residents and advanced dentistry trainees. Or, they can use the grant 
funds for continuing dental education, through distance-based education 
and practice support through teledentistry.

  Congress appropriated $2 million for this program for fiscal year 
2006 and fiscal year 2007 and just under $5 million for fiscal year 
2008.
  Thirty-six States have applied for grants from this program, but so 
far, the funding available has only been sufficient to fund programs in 
18 States. Clearly there is sufficient interest and need for this 
program to justify its extension, particularly given all of the recent 
reports documenting the very serious need to improve access to oral 
health care.
  Those 18 States that have been awarded funding under this program are 
doing great things to improve access to oral health services. Colorado, 
Georgia and Massachusetts are using the grant funds for loan 
forgiveness and repayment programs for dentists who practice in 
underserved areas and who agree to provide services to patients 
regardless of their ability to pay. Arkansas, Maine, Michigan, 
Mississippi and a number of other states are using the funds for 
recruitment and retention efforts. Delaware, Rhode Island and Vermont, 
which, like Maine, don't have dental schools, are using the funds to 
expand dental residency programs in their States.
  The legislation we are introducing today will authorize an additional 
$50 million over the next 5 years for this important program. The 
American Dental Association, the American Dental Education Association, 
and the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry have all endorsed the 
legislation, and I encourage all of our colleagues to join us as 
cosponsors.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Reid, Ms. Collins, Mr. Durbin, Mr. 
        Warner, Mr. Kerry, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Lautenberg, Mrs. 
        Lincoln, and Mr. Menendez):

[[Page S4804]]

  S. 3068. A bill to require equitable coverage of prescription 
contraceptive drugs and devices, and contraceptive services under 
health plans; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and 
Pensions.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Equity in 
Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act. I am pleased to 
be joined by my colleague from Nevada, Majority Leader Reid. I 
originally authored this legislation in 1997, and I stand today to 
resolve the issue of inequity in prescription drug coverage and to make 
certain that all American women have access to contraception methods.
  Without question, we have made remarkable progress in the number of 
employer sponsored health plans covering contraception. According to a 
study released in 2004, between 1993 and 2002, contraceptive coverage 
in employer-purchased plans covering the full range of reversible 
contraceptive methods tripled from 28 percent to 86 percent. 
Conversely, the proportion of employer plans covering no method at all 
dropped dramatically, from 28 percent to 2 percent. Yet despite these 
gains, women of reproductive age currently spend 68 percent more in 
out-of-pocket health care costs than men. Not surprisingly, this 
discrepancy is due in large part to reproductive health-related costs.
  Women whose health plans do not cover the full range of reversible 
contraceptive methods often face high out-of-pocket costs. Yet covering 
prescription contraceptives results in cost-savings not only for women, 
but for society as a whole. There are three million unintended 
pregnancies every year in the United States, and almost half of these 
pregnancies result from women who do not use contraceptives. Equal 
treatment of prescription contraceptives will reduce costs to Americans 
by preventing these unintended pregnancies, which can range anywhere 
from $5,000 to almost $9,000 in medical costs.
  The Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage Act 
will eliminate the disparate treatment of prescription contraception 
coverage. Simply put, if an employer provides insurance coverage for 
all other prescription drugs, they must also provide coverage for FDA 
approved prescription contraceptives. Our bill will ensure that women 
have comprehensive reproductive health coverage, and lower costs to 
society by preventing unintended pregnancies and thus reducing the need 
for abortion.
  I urge my colleagues to join with me in fixing the inequity in 
prescription contraception coverage to make certain that all American 
women have access to this most basic health need.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BARRASSO:
  S. 3071. A bill to amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to 
temporarily prohibit the Secretary of the Interior from considering 
global climate change as a natural or manmade factor in determining 
whether a species is a threatened or endangered species, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
  Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation to 
address the reality of the needs of species and the global nature of 
climate change.
  Recently, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service decided to list the 
polar bear as a threatened species. The reason for the listing is the 
loss of sea ice habitat. They say the ice will be subjected to 
``increased temperatures, earlier melt periods, increased rain-snow 
events, and shifts in atmospheric and marine surface patterns.'' 
Essentially, they are saying it is due to the effects of global climate 
change.
  Without the cooperation of other countries, the United States cannot 
reverse global climate change. If we are truly going to recover 
species--species that are being impacted by climate change--we would 
need to have an international agreement in place, an international 
agreement among all of the major emitting countries. All of those 
countries would have to comply with the treaty in order for species to 
receive any tangible environmental benefit. This is what people who 
care about the polar bear need to see happen.
  Unfortunately, global warming activists are looking to the U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service and to the Endangered Species Act as a means for 
widespread regulation. This would be a complete departure from the 
intent of the law.
  The Secretary of Interior, Secretary Kempthorne, has stated that he 
is providing additional guidance to ensure that there are no negative, 
unintended consequences to the legislation.
  Unfortunately, such guidance will likely not survive judicial 
challenge or perhaps even the next administration.
  For the first time ever, lawsuits could be filed to block economic 
growth and the creation of jobs all across America.
  It has been suggested that any economic activity that emits 
greenhouse gases which then contributes to global warming and to the 
melting of the polar icecaps must be stopped. Why? Because it might 
cause polar bears to become extinct.
  Think about that for a minute: Buildings could not be expanded or 
built; new roads could not be built or improved; local governments 
would be forced up to adopt onerous new zoning requirements; energy 
development projects would be brought to a standstill; and virtually 
any economic development activity one can think of could be challenged 
by anyone. Volumes of new rules and regulations from Washington, DC, 
would control everything we do.
  This action would harm individual freedom, would raise energy costs, 
and would affect consumers across the board in all 50 States. This 
action would dramatically hurt our economy.
  Frankly, when I see groups publicly stating that they intend to use 
the polar bear listing as a hammer to stop fossil fuel use, such as 
even driving your car to work, I am skeptical about their real concern 
for the polar bear.
  In a recent Baltimore Sun article, the Center for Biological 
Diversity said:

       Once protection for the polar bear is finalized, federal 
     agencies and other large greenhouse gas emitters will be 
     required by law to ensure that their emissions do not 
     jeopardize the species.

  Some want to limit how much we drive or how we heat our homes. 
Wyoming residents and Americans in general do not believe in such a 
culture of limits. That is perhaps why activists need to use and choose 
to use the courts to impose them.
  We can provide cleaner cars and be more efficient in heating our 
homes, but there is a line of individual liberty and personal choice 
that we should not cross.
  Yes, we are all concerned about protecting the environment, and as a 
Senator, I am also concerned about placing dramatic burdens on our 
economy and on our American citizens.
  Very soon, without legislative action by Congress, the Endangered 
Species Act will be transformed from a tool to recover species into a 
climate change bill. This will not only shortchange truly endangered 
species, it will also impact working families who are already 
struggling with high energy bills.
  The beneficiaries will not be the polar bears. Instead, it will be 
environmental lawyers who will reap the financial windfall through 
endless lawsuits.
  That is why today I have introduced legislation that says that the 
Secretary of Interior cannot consider global climate change as a 
natural or a manmade factor in terms of listing species as endangered. 
Under this bill, no species would be listed as threatened and 
endangered because of global warming until an international agreement 
is signed by all the major emitting nations.
  The Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency would have 
to certify that such an agreement is in place and that countries are in 
compliance with the treaty for such a listing to occur. This bill 
specifies that China and India would both have to be part of the 
agreement.
  This is not designed to give the power of legislating or listing 
species into the hands of foreign nations. The bottom line is, species 
will not receive the help they need until other countries comply. Plain 
and simple. To assert otherwise is to give false hope that those who 
care most about protecting species actually get protection.
  We do not need symbolic gestures in addressing climate change. While 
the symbolism may appease some, it does not address the very real 
impact of ordinary folks in my home State of Wyoming or anywhere across 
the Nation.

[[Page S4805]]

We are saddled with high gas prices and high energy prices already.
  Lawsuits blocking any new coal-fired powerplants can wreak havoc on 
Wyoming's economy before we have had a chance to finish developing the 
clean coal technologies of the 21st century. Clean coal technologies 
truly will address climate change.
  Mr. President, all regions that depend on coal, particularly the 
Midwest, the South, and the Rocky Mountain West, would be the hardest 
hit. But we need real solutions to address species issues, while at the 
same time ensuring that we protect working Americans.
  You want to drive your family to the beach or drive them to the 
mountains? Don't be surprised that in the not too distant future you 
need to get a government permit to do so.
  I urge all Members of this body to consider cosponsoring this 
important bill.
                                 F_____
                                 
      By Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Allard, Mr. Craig, 
        Mrs. Dole, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Ensign, Mr. Martinez, 
        Mr. Grassley, Mr. Stevens, Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Bunning, Mr. Kyl, 
        Mrs. Hutchison, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Wicker, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Coleman, 
        Mr. Isakson, Mr. Bond, Mr. Lugar, and Mr. Thune):
  S. 3073. A bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee 
Voting Act to improve procedures for the collection and delivery of 
absentee ballots of absent overseas uniformed services voters, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Rules and Administration.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, the right to participate in democratic 
elections and vote for candidates of your choice is fundamental to the 
American experience. That right to vote is safeguarded by our men and 
women in uniform, often at great personal cost to them and their loved 
ones.
  As the Global War on Terror continues, the need for overseas service 
by our troops is unlikely to let up any time soon. They routinely find 
themselves deployed to far-away battlefields in the Middle East, on 
ships at sea all across the globe, or assigned to overseas postings in 
Korea, Europe, or elsewhere.
  What's more, the decisions of elected leaders of the Federal 
Government impact our troops often in a very direct and personal way. 
As a result of decisions made by those elected leaders, our troops can 
be called to deploy to a combat zone at virtually any time.
  Statistics on overseas military voting in the 2006 election, compiled 
by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, show that there is clearly 
a problem of disenfranchisement of our troops. It is absolutely 
despicable that, of our overseas troops who asked for mail-in ballots 
for 2006, less than half, 47.6, percent of their completed ballots 
actually arrived at the local election office. Many of those arrived 
too late, and were therefore not even counted.
  To me, that is an appalling failure of our current absentee voting 
system. We need to take action now, before the problem rears its ugly 
head again, to safeguard the right of our troops to vote and have their 
votes count.
  I believe Congress has a duty to ensure these men and women in 
uniform, selflessly serving abroad, have a voice in choosing their 
elected leaders. They serve not only in the defense of freedom and the 
American way of life, but also in defense of the very system of 
government in which I and my Senate colleagues have the honor to serve.
  These military service members have already given up so much for this 
country--often being apart from their families, living in the face of 
constant danger, and standing on the front lines of our defense. We 
must not allow one of their most fundamental rights as Americans to 
fall victim to an antiquated and inefficient system of absentee voting 
and slow--sometimes painfully slow--methods of delivering their marked 
ballots.
  One of the biggest problems in absentee balloting for our overseas 
troops has been this inadequate delivery system for completed ballots.
  The simple fact is that, for many overseas military voters, their 
marked ballots arrived at the local election office too late to be 
counted. There is no excuse for allowing inefficiency to disenfranchise 
our military men and women serving abroad.
  That is why I have decided to introduce the Military Voting 
Protection Act of 2008, or MVP Act. This bill will improve the absentee 
voting system for our overseas troops by expediting the delivery of 
their marked ballots to ensure they are delivered in a timely manner 
and, at the same time, electronically tracked to provide accountability 
and allow for verification that completed ballots actually arrived at 
their local election office.
  First and foremost, this bill would expedite the process by directing 
the Pentagon to make use of express delivery services, which many of us 
use on a regular basis, to get the completed absentee ballots of our 
overseas troops to election officials here at home. At the same time, 
it would require the DOD to take a more active role in organizing the 
collection, transportation, and tracking of these ballots.
  We have at our disposal the tools necessary to more efficiently 
collect and deliver our troops' ballots to help make their votes count. 
We simply need to start utilizing more capable and expedited delivery 
methods to ensure that our troops' voices are heard.
  This bill also urges the DOD to make better use of modern technology 
to improve the ability of our troops to participate in elections. At 
the same time, the bill recognizes the clear importance of preserving 
the privacy and integrity of the voting system by calling on DOD to 
focus its efforts on secure, efficient systems that would also achieve 
these important goals.
  In this day and age, it is inexcusable for our troops to be shut out 
of the democratic process merely because they are far away from their 
homes as a result of their military service. We should not sit idly by 
and watch another election pass with a large portion of our brave 
military men and women being left out of our democratic process.
  For far too long in this country we have failed to adequately 
safeguard the right of our troops to participate in our democratic 
process. We have allowed slow delivery methods, confusing absentee 
voting procedures, and myriad other obstacles to disenfranchise many of 
our overseas troops. We must put those days behind us.
  I urge all of my colleagues to join me in addressing this important 
issue and protecting for our troops the very rights they fight to 
safeguard for us. Join me in cosponsoring the MVP Act. I look forward 
to working with my colleagues to pass this important bill quickly.

                          ____________________