[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 105 (Tuesday, June 24, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6021-S6024]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Mr. DORGAN (for himself, Mr. Nelson of Florida, and Mr. 
        Carper):
  S. 3183. A bill to amend the Commodity Exchange Act to provide oil 
and gas price relief by requiring the Commodity Futures Trading 
Commission to take action to end excessive speculation, and for other 
purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a piece of legislation 
on behalf of myself, Senator Nelson of Florida, and Senator Carper 
dealing with the subject of energy speculation. I want to run through a 
couple charts, and I want to describe the reason for the introduction 
of this legislation.
  This chart shows the price of oil and what has happened to the price 
of oil. The price of oil has nearly doubled in a year. There is no 
justification for it, no fundamentals of supply and demand that explain 
what has happened to the price of oil.
  These commodity contracts, by and large, are traded in this country 
on something called the commodity exchange--NYMEX, it is called. This 
is what it looks like. They trade back and forth, and there are 
legitimate reasons to trade on the exchanges. Those reasons to trade on 
the exchanges are for legitimate hedging for actual physical petroleum 
products for future delivery. The problem is, with respect to the oil 
markets, the legitimate hedging has become a smaller part of what is 
traded. There is now this unbelievable speculation going on in the 
commodity markets. That speculation has perverted the market, broken 
the market, causing the price of oil and gasoline to be well above that 
which is justifiable.
  We have an organization in the Government called the Energy 
Information Administration, the EIA. They are the ones who know what 
there is to know about energy issues. As shown on this chart, here is 
what they have told us. Back in May of 2007--last year--here is where 
they said the price of oil would be. Back in July, they said it would 
be on this line, as shown on this chart; back in September, on this 
line. I hope they were not buying any commodities on the basis of their 
advice--they would be flat broke in a month. Here is what happened to 
the price. It went straight up. All the while, the EIA did not seem to 
have the foggiest notion of where the price was going to go. Why? 
Because the fundamentals do not justify what is happening.
  Now I have the EIA coming down to testify before my subcommittee this 
week. I want to ask them these questions. They insist there is very 
little speculation in this marketplace. But most experts insist this 
has become an unbelievable spectacle of speculation that injures 
America's drivers and consumers, injures our industry, and causes great 
damage to our economy.
  A House study, just in the last few days, from the House Subcommittee 
on Oversight and Investigations, said here is what has happened to the 
commodities market with respect to oil. As to the oil futures market: 
37 percent used to be speculators in that market. Now it has gone to 71 
percent. The speculators have taken over that market.
  When the Commodity Exchange Act was passed by the Congress in the 
1930s, here is what the congressional report said: This bill authorizes 
the Commission--the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; that is 
supposed to be the regulating body--to fix limitations on purely 
speculative trades and commitments.
  Hedging is exempted. But for purely speculative positions, we 
provided the authority to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to 
deal with that because we did not want this market to be taken over by 
speculators.
  I have used these charts many times.
  This one has to do with Fadel Gheit, the top energy analyst for 
Oppenheimer & Co. Here is what he says:

       There is absolutely no shortage of oil. I'm convinced that 
     oil prices shouldn't be a dime above $55 a barrel.
       I call it the world's largest gambling hall. . . . It's 
     open 24/7. . . . Unfortunately, it's totally unregulated. . . 
     . This is like a highway with no cops on the beat and no 
     speed limit and everybody's going 120 miles an hour.

  I will not show all the charts I have shown in the past, but the CEO 
of Marathon Oil says:

       $100 oil isn't justified by the physical demand in the 
     market.

  It was recently reported Americans drove 4.5 to 5 billion fewer miles 
in the last 6 months than in the previous 6 months. So we are driving 4 
or 5 billion fewer miles, using less energy. Four of the first 5 months 
of this year, crude oil inventories were up--not down, up. So if the 
supply of the product is going up and the use of the product is going 
down, the marketplace would have you believe--or at least you would 
expect--the price would come down. Instead, the price has gone up, 
which demonstrates this is not about market fundamentals. It is about 
an unbelievable orgy of speculation in the marketplace that is not 
justified.
  Now the question is, Will Congress do something about it or will it 
just apply some lip gloss? Is this just something where we act as if we 
are doing something or are we going to drive the speculators out of 
this market? I am introducing legislation that is tough and real and 
will address this issue.
  The regulating body here is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. 
It has acted like most regulating bodies in recent years. Most of them 
are run by people who came to the Government not liking Government and 
not wanting to regulate. It all goes back to Mr. Pitt, back in 2001, in 
which he said: The Securities and Exchange Commission is going to be a 
business-friendly place. Well, we have seen a lot of these agencies 
that are business friendly. They just get out of the way and pretend 
they are in a deep Rip van Winkle sleep, and they are not going to see 
anything and they are not going to know anything and they are not going 
to care much about anything.

[[Page S6022]]

  This agency is not much different--the Commodity Futures Trading 
Commission. The fact is, it has been asleep on its feet, just dead from 
the neck up. It is time for us to say to this agency: It is your job to 
regulate. The fact is, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, when he signed this 
legislation some 70, 80 years ago, said:

       It should be our national policy to restrict, as far as 
     possible, the use of these exchanges for purely speculative 
     operations.

  Franklin Roosevelt knew it. Why doesn't this Commodity Futures 
Trading Commission know it?
  The legislation I am introducing today does a couple things. No. 1, 
it demands the Commodity Futures Trading Commission by date certain to 
distinguish between that which represents normal hedging transactions 
between producers and consumers of a physical product and the rest, 
which is speculation. It says this market is designed for normal 
hedging of risks between producers and consumers of a physical product. 
Others who are engaged in excess speculation are going to be slapped 
with a higher margin--a 25-percent margin requirement--that is either 
quadruple or quintuple the current requirement, depending on what is 
assessed between the 5- and 7-percent rate. But this essentially says 
to speculators: It is going to cost you more to speculate in this 
marketplace if you are one of these folks who just want to speculate to 
make a lot of money.
  Will Rogers talked about this long ago. He talked about people buying 
things they will never get from people who never had it. That is what 
is going on with investment banks, hedge funds, and a lot of others who 
are neck deep in this marketplace. They have never seen a barrel of 
oil. They don't want a barrel of oil. All they want to do is speculate 
and make a bundle of money. The problem is, it is damaging this 
country.
  My legislation, No. 1, requires the separation of legitimate traders 
verses speculators. It puts an increased margin requirement on the 
speculators to try to wring some of that speculation out of the market.
  No. 2, it requires position limits that are significant, imposed by 
the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
  No. 3, it requires the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to revoke 
or modify any previous actions they have taken in which they have 
prevented themselves from being able to regulate and see the 
transactions that exist in this futures market.
  Unbelievably almost, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which 
is the regulator, decided, on its own volition, that it would allow, 
for example, a London exchange, largely owned by American interests, to 
come in and trade on computer terminals in Atlanta, GA, and pretend 
they are not American. So the Commodity Futures Trading Commission 
said: Do you know what, we will do a letter of no action so we can't 
regulate and can't see it. That is unbelievable, in my judgment. It is 
an unbelievably irresponsible position for a regulator to have taken. 
It is taken, I suppose, by those who believe ``regulations'' is a four-
letter word. It is not. If ever we wonder about that, take a look at 
what has happened to the price of oil and gas in a situation where 
speculators have taken over.
  The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is a regulator of this 
market. It has done a miserable job. It has nearly all the authority it 
needs to do the right thing. What I propose to do with the Commodity 
Futures Trading Commission is wring the speculators out of this market. 
They have distorted the market, broken the market, and we end up in a 
situation now where the price of gasoline is devastating this economy. 
The price of oil is not justified by supply and demand. When that 
happens, there is a responsibility for this Congress to act. It is an 
urgent responsibility, in my judgment, now for this Congress to say 
what is happening is wrong, it is hurting this country's economy, it is 
hurting industries and the American people, and we need to do something 
about it. The best start, in my judgment, would be to pass this 
legislation I am introducing today.
  One final point. I am reaching out to Democratic and Republican 
offices in the hopes that this will be a bipartisan piece of 
legislation that will address a very serious issue on an urgent basis 
and begin to do something that moderates the price of oil and gas that 
many experts have told us is 20, 30, and in some cases 40 percent above 
that which is justified by the marketplace. We should not stand for it. 
We do not have to. We ought to pass this legislation soon.
      By Mr. KERRY:
  S. 3184. A bill to make grants to States to implement statewide 
portal initiatives, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Finance.
  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, we must do all we can to ensure that our 
young people have the skills necessary to compete in today's global 
economy. My home State of Massachusetts has done an outstanding job 
ensuring that educators have access to the high-quality tools necessary 
to adequately prepare our students for the future. In particular, they 
have been one of a handful of pioneering states that have created a 
statewide, online education ``portal'', which is a suite of web-based 
tools that enhance the teaching and learning experience for teachers, 
parents, and students.
  Education portals are a one-stop resource for educators, parents, and 
students to support teaching and learning, as well as leadership 
skills. Portals provide access to shared resources and create an entry 
point to other information and services including: lesson plans; 
research-based training resources; model classroom examples; engaging 
interactive media; listservs; and after-school resources. Among other 
things, a portal allows educators to quickly search for lesson plans or 
other resources by content standard, grade level, specific student and 
classroom needs, and/or topic. It also provides a secure, on-line 
community for educators to collaborate and discuss teaching and 
learning experiences, as well as providing a vital communication tool 
between the school and parents.
  It is for these reasons, I am sponsoring legislation to help my State 
and others secure the funding they need to improve their education 
systems and prepare their students for success. While it is true that 
Congress has done a lot to promote education technology and set higher 
standards for teachers, more must be done to address the divide that 
afflicts so many of our rural and urban schools.
  What is missing is a funding source for states to develop and 
maintain web-based tools for training, communication, collaboration, 
and curriculum planning. The Empowering Teaching and Learning Through 
Education Portals Act establishes annual competitive grants that will 
provide funding on a one-to-one basis for states that wish to implement 
and maintain best-practice education portals. The legislation also 
provides new tax incentives to private organizations that support State 
education portal efforts.
  The Empowering Teaching and Learning Through Education Portals Act 
bridges the urban-rural digital divide by ensuring that all districts 
have access to the best available resources. It supports high quality 
teaching, professional development and retention of teachers and 
promotes an on-line support network and learning community for teachers 
and administrators. Furthermore, it provides teacher coaching and 
guidance in order to address the challenges of teaching a diverse 
student body, and collaborate on winning strategies to address various 
learning styles, needs, and achievement levels. It offers 
administrators tools to securely communicate and collaborate with 
district personnel, as well as with the Department of Education, and 
gives them access to formative assessments and other resources. 
Finally, it provides a means to actively engage students in a rich, 
relevant, multimedia environment that results in improved learning and 
student retention.
  It is imperative that we prepare our children for the sophisticated 
workforce of the 21st century and an increasingly competitive global 
economy. This legislation takes some of the brightest ideas for 
modernizing teaching and learning and matches them with the dollars 
needed to translate them from paper to practice. That, I believe, is a 
goal we can all agree on.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Empowering Teaching and Learning 
Through Education Portals Act.
  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:

[[Page S6023]]

                                S. 3184

       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 ``Empowering Teaching and 
     Learning Through Education Portals Act''.

     SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

       In this Act:
       (1) 21st century skills.--The term ``21st century 
     skills''--
       (A) means skills that students need to succeed in school, 
     work, and life; and
       (B) includes--
       (i) skills related either to core academic subjects or to 
     21st century themes;
       (ii) learning and innovation skills, such as--

       (I) creativity and innovation;
       (II) critical thinking and problem solving; or
       (III) communication and collaboration; and

       (iii) life and career skills to prepare students for the 
     global economy, such as--

       (I) flexibility and adaptability;
       (II) productivity and accountability; or
       (III) leadership and responsibility.

       (2) Core academic subjects; educational agencies; schools; 
     state.--The terms ``core academic subjects'', ``elementary 
     school'', ``local educational agency'', ``secondary school'', 
     ``State'', and ``State educational agency'' have the meanings 
     given the terms in section 9101 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       (3) Covered educator.--The term ``covered educator'' means 
     a teacher, administrator, or other professional staff member, 
     at a covered school.
       (4) Covered parent.--The term ``covered parent'' means the 
     parent of a covered student.
       (5) Covered school.--The term ``covered school'' means a 
     Head Start agency operating a Head Start program, or a public 
     school that is a preschool, elementary school, secondary 
     school, or institution of higher education (including such an 
     institution offering a program leading to a baccalaureate 
     degree or a program leading to an advanced degree).
       (6) Covered student.--The term ``covered student'' means a 
     student at a covered school.
       (7) Covered teacher.--The term ``covered teacher'' means a 
     teacher at a covered school.
       (8) Education technology.--The term ``education 
     technology'' means any technology resource that improves the 
     learning, training, and engagement of students or helps 
     teachers learn, improve their knowledge, and practice.
       (9) Institution of higher education.--The term 
     ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the 
     term in sections 101 and 102 of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001, 1002).
       (10) Professional development.--The term ``professional 
     development'' means a resource or training that increases a 
     teacher's skills, content knowledge, or other information 
     that has a positive impact on student learning.
       (11) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of Education.

     SEC. 3. GRANTS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may award grants to eligible 
     States, to pay for the Federal share of the cost of 
     implementing and maintaining education portal initiatives.
       (b) Amounts.--The Secretary may award the grants for 
     periods of not less than 1 year and not more than 3 years.
       (c) Federal Share.--
       (1) In general.--The Federal share of the cost described in 
     subsection (a) shall be 50 percent.
       (2) Non-federal share.--The State may provide the non-
     Federal share of the cost in cash or in kind, fairly 
     evaluated, including plant, equipment, or services. The State 
     may provide the non-Federal share from State, local, or 
     private sources.

     SEC. 4. APPLICATIONS AND AWARDS.

       (a) In General.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this section for an initiative, a State shall submit an 
     application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, 
     and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
       (b) Contents.--The application shall contain, at a 
     minimum--
       (1) a comprehensive plan for the initiative for which the 
     State seeks the grant, including evidence that the initiative 
     meets the requirements of subsections (a) and (c) of section 
     5;
       (2) information describing how the State will provide the 
     non-Federal share of the cost described in section 3(a), and 
     will continue to provide that share during the implementation 
     of the initiative and the remainder of the grant period;
       (3) information describing how the State will meet the 
     maintenance of effort requirements in section 6;
       (4) information explaining the protocol the State will use 
     to ensure safe and legal access to the education portal;
       (5) an assurance that the State has established or will 
     establish an advisory panel, to provide advice on the 
     implementation and maintenance of the initiative, including 
     representatives of leaders in school districts, leaders at 
     institutions of higher education, State educational agencies, 
     parents, and teachers; and
       (6) a plan to ensure sufficient statewide bandwidth 
     capacity and systems access to implement and maintain the 
     State education portal.
       (c) Awards.--In determining the amounts of grants under 
     this Act, the Secretary--
       (1) shall take into consideration the extent to which a 
     State has developed and implemented an education portal 
     initiative prior to the date of the submission of the 
     application involved; but
       (2) shall not penalize States that have made greater 
     progress in developing and implementing such initiatives.

     SEC. 5. USE OF FUNDS.

       (a) Required Uses.--A State that receives a grant under 
     this Act for a fiscal year shall use the funds made available 
     through the grant to implement or maintain an education 
     portal initiative that includes--
       (1) collecting and making available--
       (A) high quality resources (including data, tools, and 
     digital media content) for covered educators, covered 
     students, and covered parents, that support teaching, 
     leading, and learning, and are, as appropriate, aligned with 
     State education standards; and
       (B) information for covered teachers to use in assisting 
     covered students to attain skills such as 21st century 
     skills; and
       (2) collecting resources for ongoing and sustainable 
     professional development for covered educators, related to 
     the use of education technology, and making the resources 
     available through the implementation of research-based 
     methods and strategies for teacher coaching, collaborating, 
     or mentoring.
       (b) Allowable Uses.--The State may use the funds made 
     available through the grant for such an initiative, for a 
     portal that--
       (1) gives covered educators access to formative assessment 
     and other resources to address various student learning 
     styles, needs, and achievement levels;
       (2) provides an entry point to other information or 
     services, including information on model examples of 
     effective classroom practices, subscriptions or data systems, 
     content standards, lesson plans, courses of study, engaging 
     interactive media, Web resources, e-mail list management 
     software, online portfolios, after-school program resources, 
     and other educational resources;
       (3) provides access to technology-based curriculum 
     resources and tools that promote the teaching and learning of 
     21st century skills;
       (4) enables covered educators to quickly search for lesson 
     plans, professional development resources, model examples of 
     effective classroom practices, or other resources, by content 
     standard, grade level, or topic;
       (5) provides an online support network or community for 
     covered educators to collaborate on and discuss teaching, 
     learning, curricula, and experiences, and serves as a 
     communication tool between covered educators and covered 
     parents;
       (6) includes digital media content developed by a 
     television public broadcasting entity in coordination with 
     the grant recipient; or
       (7) makes available access to 1 or more resource sections 
     of the education portal, subject to the protocol described in 
     section 4(b)(4), by covered education, covered students, and 
     covered parents, from other States (with no requirement for 
     State-specific log-ins), so that those covered educators, 
     covered students, and covered parents can benefit from 
     resources developed in the State, thereby expanding access to 
     the national learning community.
       (c) Provision of and Access to Resources.--The covered 
     educators, covered students, and covered parents in the State 
     may provide resources and information for the education 
     portal, subject to the protocol described in section 4(b)(4). 
     The resources and information in the education portal shall 
     be accessible statewide by the educators, students, and 
     parents, subject to the protocol.
       (d) Other Federal Funds.--A State that receives a grant 
     under part A of title II of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6601 et seq.) may use funds 
     made available through that grant to maintain (but not 
     implement) the State's education portal initiative under this 
     Act, after the end of the period in which the State receives 
     funding under this Act.
       (e) Conforming Amendment.--Section 2113(a) of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6613(a)) is amended by striking ``A'' and inserting ``Subject 
     to section 5 of the Empowering Teaching and Learning Through 
     Education Portals Act, a''.

     SEC. 6. MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT.

       (a) In General.--A State that receives a grant under this 
     Act for a fiscal year shall maintain the expenditures of the 
     State for education portal initiatives at a level not less 
     than the level of such expenditures of the State for the 
     fiscal year preceding the first fiscal year for which the 
     State received such a grant.
       (b) Reduction.--If the Secretary determines that a State, 
     during a fiscal year, expends less than the sum required to 
     comply with subsection (a), the Secretary shall--
       (1) determine the difference between the required sum and 
     the expenditure; and
       (2) reduce the State's grant under this Act for the 
     following year by the amount of the difference.

     SEC. 7. EVALUATIONS AND CONFERENCE.

       (a) Federal Evaluation.--The Secretary shall conduct an 
     evaluation of each initiative funded under this Act. The 
     Secretary

[[Page S6024]]

     shall submit a report containing the results of the 
     evaluation to Congress.
       (b) Federal Conference.--Not less often than once every 2 
     years, the Secretary shall hold a conference for advisory 
     panels described in section 4(b)(5), to share information on 
     best practices relating to education portal initiatives.
       (c) State Evaluations.--Each State that receives a grant 
     under this Act shall conduct an evaluation of the initiative 
     funded under the grant, using funds provided as part of the 
     non-Federal share of the costs described in section 3(a). The 
     State shall prepare and submit to the Secretary a report 
     containing the results of the evaluation.

     SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act $100,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 through 2012, 
     and such sums as may be necessary for each of the following 2 
     fiscal years.

     SEC. 9. SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO CORPORATE CHARITABLE 
                   CONTRIBUTIONS TO EDUCATION PORTAL PROJECTS OF 
                   ELIGIBLE STATES.

       (a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of Section 170(b) of the 
     Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (related to percentage 
     limitations) is amended by redesignating subparagraphs (C) 
     and (D), respectively, and by inserting after subparagraph 
     (A) the following new subparagraph:
       ``(B) Special rule for corporate contributions to education 
     portal projects of eligible states.--
       ``(i) In general.--In the case of qualified education 
     portal project contributions--

       ``(I) subparagraph (A) shall be applied separately with 
     respect to such contributions and with respect to other 
     charitable contributions of the taxpayer, and
       ``(II) in applying subparagraph (A) to such qualified 
     education portal project contributions, subparagraph (A) 
     shall be applied by substituting `50 percent' for `10 
     percent'.

       ``(ii) Qualified education portal project contribution.--
     For purposes of this paragraph, the term `qualified education 
     portal project contribution' means a charitable contribution 
     in cash--

       ``(I) to a State (as defined in section 2 of the Empowering 
     Teaching and Learning Through Education Portals Act) which 
     has a grant application approved under section 4 of such Act, 
     and
       ``(II) for the purpose of paying the non-Federal share of 
     the cost of implementing and maintaining education portal 
     initiatives (within the meaning of section 3 of such Act).''.

       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to contributions made after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.
                                 ______
                                 
      Mr. BIDEN (for himself and Mr. Lugar) (by request):
  S.J. Res. 42. A joint resolution relating to the approval of the 
proposed agreement for nuclear cooperation between the United States 
and the Russian Federation; to the Committee on Foreign Relations 
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 2159, for not to exceed 45 calendar days.
  Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, today Senator Lugar and I introduce, by 
request, a resolution of approval of the proposed agreement for 
peaceful nuclear cooperation between the United States and the Russian 
Federation, which the President transmitted to Congress on May 13, 
2008, pursuant to sections 123b. and 123d. of the Atomic Energy Act. 
Pursuant to section 130i.(2) of that Act, the majority and minority 
leaders have designated Senator Lugar and me to introduce this 
resolution.

                          ____________________