[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 96 (Thursday, June 24, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5440-S5447]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

      By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Whitehouse, Ms. 
        Collins, Mrs. Shaheen, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Kerry, Ms. Cantwell, Mr. 
        Reed, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Begich):
  S. 3528. A bill to promote coastal jobs creation, promote sustainable 
fisheries and fishing communities, revitalize waterfronts, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation.
  Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Coastal Jobs 
Creation Act of 2010. This bill would establish a grant program within 
the Department of Commerce to enhance employment opportunities for 
coastal communities by increasing support for cooperative research 
programs, revitalization of coastal infrastructure, and stewardship of 
coastal and marine resources. As Ranking Member of the Senate 
Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, and as 
a Senator from a State which relies heavily on its coastal region as an 
economic driver, I am acutely aware of the hardships that have been 
visited on these areas in recent years.
  I particularly want to thank my lead cosponsor on this key piece of 
legislation, Senator Lautenberg. Clearly, his home State of New Jersey 
shares many of the same issues we face in Maine when it comes to 
ensuring the vitality of our historic fishing and coastal industries, 
and I greatly appreciate his support of this initiative. I also want to 
thank the bill's additional cosponsors, Senators Whitehouse, Collins, 
Shaheen, Boxer, Kerry, and Cantwell, for their vital contributions.
  As our Nation struggles to recover from the ongoing recession, it is 
critical that we do all we can to create employment opportunities. I 
have said it before, and I will say it again: the jobless recovery that 
our Nation is currently experiencing is not a true economic recovery. 
While the most recent unemployment figures may have shown a decline 
from 9.9 to 9.7 percent--of course, welcome news--the private sector is 
not creating jobs. Indeed, there were 411,000 temporary Census 
employees hired in May, as opposed to the 41,000 new jobs in the 
private sector. This does not bode well for our future

[[Page S5441]]

economic health, and does not instill confidence in our fragile 
economy.
  Ultimately, what affects our coastal economy drives our Nation's 
economy. More than 75 percent of growth in this country from 1997 to 
2007, whether measured in population, jobs, or GDP, occurred in coastal 
States, and more than half of U.S. citizens live in coastal 
communities. As the Nation's economy has struggled through the ongoing 
recession, maritime industries have experienced more than their share 
of hardship. This has been compounded in the fishing industry by 
regulatory changes mandated by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act which we reauthorized in 2006. The law 
now requires strict, science-based annual catch limits to be imposed in 
all fisheries by 2011. While we expect these changes will ultimately be 
beneficial to the health of the fish stocks, they have dire economic 
implications today.
  On April 18, 2010, Bumble Bee Foods shuttered the last sardine 
cannery in the United States, which had been located in Prospect 
Harbor, Maine. This closure can be attributed to a single cause: the 
National Marine Fisheries Service's decision to slash the catch limit 
for herring by 38 percent for 2010, meaning there were not enough fish 
available to supply the plant. Scientists did not recommend this 
reduction because herring is overfished--it is not--but rather because 
they did not have the data to provide sufficient confidence in the 
stock assessment. In addition to impacts on the herring and lobster 
fisheries, this lack of data has directly resulted in a century-old 
fish processing plant closing its doors, costing an economically 
depressed community 130 jobs and spelling the end of an entire industry 
in the United States. If the law's new mandates are to be effective, 
they will require an infusion of better scientific data. The grant 
program authorized in this legislation will lead to more cooperative 
research to improve fishery-dependent data and increase employment 
opportunities for fishermen by involving them in the research process.
  An additional concern this bill would help alleviate is the rapid 
decline in availability of working waterfront property. As Americans 
move to the coast in greater numbers, the demand for waterfront 
property increases, boosting prices and raising the tax burdens on 
waterfront property owners. According to a report by Maine Sea Grant 
and the Island Institute, a non-profit advocacy group, of the more than 
5,300 miles of Maine's coastline, just 20 miles remain in use as 
working waterfront property--less than half of one percent of the 
potential area. This bill would authorize grants to recapitalize 
working waterfront property to stem the loss of this vital 
infrastructure without which our coastal industries will simply vanish.
  If enacted, this critical legislation would greatly enhance the 
health and vitality of our Nation's coastal communities, and help put 
our Nation on a path to a true economic recovery, driven by small 
businesses and private sector job creation. Once again, I thank Senator 
Lautenberg, and all of my cosponsors again for their efforts in 
developing this vital legislation.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mrs. HAGAN:
  S. 3529. A bill to require that certain Federal job training and 
career education programs give priority to programs that provide an 
industry-recognized and nationally portable credential; to the 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
  Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, today, I am proud to introduce an 
important piece of legislation to spur job growth across America. The 
American Manufacturing Efficiency and Retraining Investment 
Collaboration Achievement Works Act also known as the AMERICA Works Act 
is part of the solution to the Nation's unemployment problem.
  With the national unemployment rate at 9.7 percent, and at 10.8 
percent in my home state of North Carolina, we need to do everything we 
can to reinvigorate the American workforce.
  The United States needs a strong technical workforce. Our country is 
facing a widening skills gap between older workers with advanced 
technical skills who will be retiring in the next few years, and the 
younger workers who have not yet received adequate training to replace 
them. The benefits of industry-recognized credentials are widely known, 
but too often those credentials do not count toward educational 
requirements, do not match the needs of local employers, or require too 
much time to earn just one credential. Ultimately, the system ends up 
breaking down, to the detriment of instructors, employers, and 
employees.
  The AMERICA Works Act would give priority to Federal job training 
programs that provide an industry-recognized and nationally-portable 
credential. The legislation encourages national industries to come 
together and agree upon common standards, defining the skill sets 
needed in employees. Once industries have agreed upon standards, they 
can work with educational institutions to turn the standards into 
workable curriculums with tiered or stackable credentials. Ultimately, 
local workforce boards can help workers seeking training and employment 
opportunity by directing them toward job training programs that have 
priority under existing Federal programs.
  The AMERICA Works Act would require certain Federal job training and 
career development education programs to give priority to programs that 
provide an industry-recognized and nationally-portable credential. This 
credentialing system starts out with basic competencies that prepare 
individuals for the workplace. Once basic competencies are completed, 
individuals can work toward high performance technical competencies and 
then progress further to highly skilled technical and management 
competencies. The credentialing levels are stackable, allowing workers 
flexibility along their career tracks. Stackable credentials provide 
straight forward paths, with clear entry and exit points, for workers 
to advance their careers and attain high quality jobs.
  In North Carolina, we have an advanced manufacturing skills program 
at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem. Forsyth 
Technical Community College is participating in the National 
Association of Manufacturers Endorsed Skills Certification System, 
which offers credit programs toward nationally-recognized, stackable 
credentials. Currently, they have 207 students enrolled in their 
programs. Forsyth Technical has already collaborated with State and 
local businesses to begin the process of incorporating their 
credentials into job descriptions. They believe that introducing 
graduates with skill certifications into the local workforce will help 
improve the hiring process, and these nationally-recognized credentials 
will increase employment opportunities.
  The AMERICA Works Act will benefit business. When businesses clearly 
identify skills they need in their employees, educational institutions 
can tailor programs to teach those skills and workers will be better 
suited to meet their needs--starting on day one.
  This legislation will benefit workers. Stackable credentials benefit 
workers by offering several on-ramps and off-ramps to a two-year 
technical degree: workers in training can exit the system having earned 
a basic, industry-recognized credential that qualifies them for 
employment, but without having completed the full two-year technical 
degree, and they can easily re-enter the system later to move up within 
their field and work toward the more advanced degree.
  The AMERICA Works Act will benefit educational programs. Local 
educational institutes want to provide their students with the most 
useful skills possible. Open lines of communication between businesses, 
workforce boards and workers will better enable them to do just that.
  This legislation will benefit local economies. Local workforce boards 
will have the chance to determine which skills training programs are 
most valuable for their region, today and into the future. Local areas 
with well-trained workforces can more effectively lure new businesses. 
While this bill mentions manufacturing, it would benefit any industry 
that meets the criteria established in the legislation.
  I want to do everything I can to create jobs and make sure our 
workers have the skills needed to help our businesses grow and thrive. 
By incentivizing companies to work with educational institutes and 
develop industry-recognized, nationally-portable,

[[Page S5442]]

and stackable credentialing curricula, we can ensure that we have the 
best businesses, with the best workers, trained at the best institutes.
  I urge my other colleagues to join me in supporting this important 
bill to enhance employment opportunity for hardworking Americans.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Ms. LANDRIEU (for herself and Mr. Dorgan):
  S. 3534. A bill to establish a Native American entrepreneurial 
development program in the Small Business Administration; to the 
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, as Chair of the Committee on Small 
Business and Entrepreneurship, I am pleased to introduce the Native 
American Small Business Assistance and Entrepreneurial Growth Act of 
2010. This vital and timely legislation codifies and builds upon the 
Small Business Administration's, SBA, existing efforts through the 
Office of Native American Affairs, which is responsible for overseeing 
and implementing programs that are specifically tailored to meet the 
needs of the Native American community. By strengthening and improving 
these programs, the SBA will be able to reach even more Native 
Americans, helping them to achieve their dream of starting or growing 
their own small businesses and spurring vital and necessary growth 
within tribal communities.
  According to the most recent report released by the U.S. Census 
bureau, the ``three year average poverty rate for American Indians and 
Alaska Natives was 25.9 percent higher than for any other race 
groups.'' Additionally, research shows that entrepreneurial development 
is playing a significant role in promoting healthy tribal economies, 
and fostering much needed economic growth in various industries. Data 
from the 2000 U.S. Census shows that since 1997, the number of Native 
American-owned businesses has risen by 84 percent to 197,300, and that 
their gross incomes have increased by 179 percent to $34.5 billion.
  However, in the face of historically high unemployment and tight 
credit, particularly for Native Americans, starting a business has 
never been more difficult. During the 111th Congress, the Committee has 
heard from industry experts, organizational leaders and entrepreneurs 
working in or on behalf of Native American communities. From them, we 
know that, despite the growth we are seeing in Native American-owned 
businesses, more resources are needed to provide additional technical 
assistance and business development opportunities so as to ensure the 
economic sustainability and growth within tribal communities. According 
to the Aspen Institute, ``training and technical assistance are 
arguably the most important components of microenterprise development 
services in the United States, particularly when those services are 
aimed at low-income clients.'' Additionally, according to the 
Corporation for Enterprise Development, this is particularly true for 
Native American entrepreneurs operating in environments that have not 
traditionally been geared towards private enterprise. For these 
reasons, it is critical that we do more to provide necessary resources 
for Native American entrepreneurial development programs that are 
working to address critical sustainability issues in tribal 
communities.
  That is why today I am introducing the Native American Small Business 
Assistance and Entrepreneurial Growth Act of 2010. Since its 
establishment, SBA's Office of Native American Affairs worked to 
promote and support Native American entrepreneurs and to encourage 
important entrepreneurial activity in Native American communities. This 
legislation will further enhance and improve the existing programs 
within the Office of Native American Affairs, as well as create a new 
program that provides financial assistance to eligible entities to 
create Native American business centers which will conduct projects to 
provide culturally tailored business development training and related 
services to Native Americans and Native American small business 
concerns.
  In introducing this important piece of legislation today, I would 
note that many of the provisions in this bill were included in S. 1229, 
the Entrepreneurial Development Act of 2009, which I introduced earlier 
this Congress and which passed out of Committee with unanimous and bi-
partisan support in June of 2009. It is also the basis for many of the 
SBA related provisions included in the Native American Employment Act 
of 2010 that Senator Dorgan, Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on 
Indian Affairs introduced earlier this month. Given the importance of 
this legislation to hundreds of thousands of Native American-owned 
businesses, and the potential we have before us to strengthen one of 
America's greatest emerging markets, I have decided to re-introduce 
these provisions as a stand-alone bill. I look forward to working with 
my colleagues in the Senate to bring this legislation to the 
President's desk in the coming months.
  In closing, I would like to thank Chairman Dorgan for his continued 
leadership on behalf of existing and future Native American small 
business owners, and especially for his cosponsorship of this important 
legislation. Chairman Dorgan has been a tireless advocate for Native 
American communities across the country and in his home state of North 
Dakota, and I am pleased to have his support on this legislation.
  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. 3534

       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 ``Native American Small 
     Business Assistance and Entrepreneurial Growth Act of 2010''.

     SEC. 2. NATIVE AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

       The Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 4(b)(1) (15 U.S.C. 633(b)(1))--
       (A) in the fifth sentence, by striking ``five Associate 
     Administrators'' and inserting ``6 Associate 
     Administrators''; and
       (B) by inserting after the fifth sentence the following: 
     ``1 Associate Administrator shall be the Associate 
     Administrator of the Office of Native American Affairs 
     established by section 44.'';
       (2) by redesignating section 44 as section 45; and
       (3) by inserting after section 43 (15 U.S.C. 657o) the 
     following:

     ``SEC. 44. NATIVE AMERICAN SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT 
                   PROGRAM.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this section:
       ``(1) Associate administrator.--The term `Associate 
     Administrator' means the Associate Administrator of the 
     Office of Native American Affairs established under 
     subsection (b).
       ``(2) Center; native american business center.--The terms 
     `center' and `Native American business center' mean a center 
     established under subsection (c).
       ``(3) Eligible applicant.--The term `eligible applicant' 
     means--
       ``(A) a tribal college;
       ``(B) a private, nonprofit organization--
       ``(i) that provides business and financial or procurement 
     technical assistance to 1 or more Native American 
     communities; and
       ``(ii) that is dedicated to assisting one or more Native 
     American communities; or
       ``(C) a small business development center, women's business 
     center, or other private organization participating in a 
     joint project.
       ``(4) Joint project.--The term `joint project' means a 
     project that--
       ``(A) combines the resources and expertise of 2 or more 
     distinct entities at a physical location dedicated to 
     assisting the Native American community; and
       ``(B) submits to the Administration a joint application 
     that contains--
       ``(i) a certification that each participant of the 
     project--

       ``(I) is an eligible applicant;
       ``(II) employs an executive director or program manager to 
     manage the center; and

       ``(ii) information demonstrating a record of commitment to 
     providing assistance to Native Americans and;
       ``(iii) information demonstrating that the participants in 
     the joint project have the ability and resources to meet the 
     needs, including the cultural needs, of the Native Americans 
     to be served by the project.
       ``(5) Native american small business concern.--The term 
     `Native American small business concern' means a small 
     business concern that is at least 51 percent owned and 
     controlled by --
       ``(A) an Indian tribe or a Native Hawaiian Organization, as 
     the terms are described in paragraphs (13) and (15) of 
     section 8(a), respectively; or
       ``(B) 1 or more individuals members of an Indian tribe or 
     Native Hawaiian Organization.
       ``(6) Native american small business development program.--
     The term `Native American small business development program' 
     means the program established under subsection (c).

[[Page S5443]]

       ``(7) Small business concern.--The term `small business 
     concern' has the same meaning as in section 3.
       ``(8) Small business development center.--The term `small 
     business development center' means a small business 
     development center described in section 21.
       ``(9) Tribal college.--The term `tribal college' has the 
     meaning given the term `tribally controlled college or 
     university' in section 2(a) of the Tribally Controlled 
     Community College Assistance Act of 1978 (25 U.S.C. 1801(a)).
       ``(10) Tribal land.--The term `tribal land' has the meaning 
     given the term `reservation' in section 3 of the Indian 
     Financing Act ( 25 U.S.C. 1452).
       ``(b) Office of Native American Affairs.--
       ``(1) Establishment.--There is established within the 
     Administration the Office of Native American Affairs, which, 
     under the direction of the Associate Administrator, shall 
     implement the programs of the Administration for the 
     development of business enterprises by Native Americans.
       ``(2) Purpose.--The purpose of the Office of Native 
     American Affairs is to help Native American small business 
     concerns--
       ``(A) to start, operate, and increase the business of small 
     business concerns;
       ``(B) to develop management and technical skills;
       ``(C) to seek Federal procurement opportunities;
       ``(D) to increase employment opportunities for Native 
     Americans through the establishment and expansion of small 
     business concerns; and
       ``(E) to increase the access of Native Americans to capital 
     markets.
       ``(3) Associate administrator.--
       ``(A) Appointment.--The Administrator shall appoint a 
     qualified individual to serve as Associate Administrator of 
     the Office of Native American Affairs in accordance with this 
     paragraph.
       ``(B) Qualifications.--The Associate Administrator 
     appointed under subparagraph (A) shall have--
       ``(i) knowledge of Native American culture; and
       ``(ii) experience providing culturally tailored small 
     business development assistance to Native Americans.
       ``(C) Employment status.--The Administrator shall establish 
     the position of Associate Administrator, who shall--
       ``(i) be an appointee in the Senior Executive Service (as 
     defined in section 3132(a) of title 5, United States Code); 
     and
       ``(ii) shall report to and be responsible directly to the 
     Administrator.
       ``(D) Responsibilities and duties.--The Associate 
     Administrator shall--
       ``(i) administer and manage the Native American small 
     business development program;
       ``(ii) formulate, execute, and promote the policies and 
     programs of the Administration that provide assistance to 
     small business concerns owned and controlled by Native 
     Americans;
       ``(iii) act as an ombudsman for full consideration of 
     Native Americans in all programs of the Administration;
       ``(iv) recommend the annual administrative and program 
     budgets for the Office of Native American Affairs;
       ``(v) consult with Native American business centers in 
     carrying out the Native American small business development 
     program;
       ``(vi) recommend appropriate funding levels;
       ``(vii) review the annual budgets submitted by each 
     applicant for the Native American small business development 
     program;
       ``(viii) select applicants to participate in the Native 
     American small business development program;
       ``(ix) implement this section; and
       ``(x) maintain a clearinghouse for the dissemination and 
     exchange of information between all Administration-sponsored 
     business centers.
       ``(E) Consultation requirements.--In carrying out the 
     responsibilities and duties described in this paragraph, the 
     Associate Administrator shall confer with and seek the advice 
     of--
       ``(i) officials of the Administration working in areas 
     served by Native American business centers; and
       ``(ii) eligible applicants.
       ``(c) Native American Small Business Development Program.--
       ``(1) Financial assistance.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Administration, acting through the 
     Associate Administrator, shall provide financial assistance 
     to eligible applicants to establish Native American business 
     centers in accordance with this section.
       ``(B) Use of funds.--The financial and resource assistance 
     provided under this subsection shall be used to establish a 
     Native American business center to overcome obstacles 
     impeding the establishment, development, and expansion of 
     small business concerns, in accordance with this section.
       ``(2) 5-year projects.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each Native American business center 
     that receives assistance under paragraph (1)(A) shall conduct 
     a 5-year project that offers culturally tailored business 
     development assistance in the form of--
       ``(i) financial education, including training and 
     counseling in--

       ``(I) applying for and securing business credit and 
     investment capital;
       ``(II) preparing and presenting financial statements; and
       ``(III) managing cash flow and other financial operations 
     of a business concern;

       ``(ii) management education, including training and 
     counseling in planning, organizing, staffing, directing, and 
     controlling each major activity and function of a small 
     business concern; and
       ``(iii) marketing education, including training and 
     counseling in--

       ``(I) identifying and segmenting domestic and international 
     market opportunities;
       ``(II) preparing and executing marketing plans;
       ``(III) developing pricing strategies;
       ``(IV) locating contract opportunities;
       ``(V) negotiating contracts; and
       ``(VI) using varying public relations and advertising 
     techniques.

       ``(B) Business development assistance recipients.--The 
     business development assistance under subparagraph (A) shall 
     be offered to prospective and current owners of Native 
     American small business concerns.
       ``(3) Form of federal financial assistance.--
       ``(A) Documentation.--The financial assistance to Native 
     American business centers authorized under this subsection 
     may be made by grant, contract, or cooperative agreement.
       ``(B) Payments.--
       ``(i) Timing.--Payments made under this subsection may be 
     disbursed in periodic installments, at the request of the 
     recipient.
       ``(ii) Advance.--The Administrator may disburse not more 
     than 25 percent of the annual amount of Federal financial 
     assistance awarded to a Native American business center after 
     notice of the award has been issued.
       ``(C) Non-federal contributions.--
       ``(i) In general.--

       ``(I) Initial financial assistance.--Except as provided in 
     subclause (II), an eligible applicant that receives financial 
     assistance under this subsection shall provide non-Federal 
     contributions for the operation of the Native American 
     business center established by the eligible applicant in an 
     amount equal to--

       ``(aa) in each of the first and second years of the 
     project, not less than 33 percent of the amount of the 
     financial assistance received under this subsection; and
       ``(bb) in the third through fifth years of the project, not 
     less than 50 percent of the amount of the financial 
     assistance received under this subsection.

       ``(II) Renewals.--An eligible applicant that receives a 
     renewal of financial assistance under this subsection shall 
     provide non-Federal contributions for the operation of a 
     Native American business center established by the eligible 
     applicant in an amount equal to not less than 50 percent of 
     the amount of the financial assistance received under this 
     subsection.
       ``(III) Exceptions.--The requirements of this section may 
     be waived at the discretion of the Administrator, based on an 
     evaluation of the ability of the eligible applicant to 
     provide non-Federal contributions.

       ``(4) Contract and cooperative agreement authority.--A 
     Native American business center may enter into a contract or 
     cooperative agreement with a Federal department or agency to 
     provide specific assistance to Native American and other 
     underserved small business concerns located on or near tribal 
     land, to the extent that the contract or cooperative 
     agreement is consistent with and does not duplicate the terms 
     of any assistance received by the Native American business 
     center from the Administration.
       ``(5) Application process.--
       ``(A) Submission of a 5-year plan.--Each applicant for 
     assistance under paragraph (1) shall submit a 5-year plan to 
     the Administration on proposed assistance and training 
     activities.
       ``(B) Criteria.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Administrator shall evaluate 
     applicants for financial assistance under this subsection in 
     accordance with selection criteria that are--

       ``(I) established before the date on which eligible 
     applicants are required to submit the applications;
       ``(II) stated in terms of relative importance; and
       ``(III) publicly available and stated in each solicitation 
     for applications for financial assistance under this 
     subsection made by the Administrator.

       ``(ii) Considerations.--The criteria required by this 
     subparagraph shall include--

       ``(I) the experience of the applicant in conducting 
     programs or ongoing efforts designed to impart or upgrade the 
     business skills of current or potential owners of Native 
     American small business concerns;
       ``(II) the ability of the applicant to commence a project 
     within a minimum amount of time;
       ``(III) the ability of the applicant to provide quality 
     training and services to a significant number of Native 
     Americans;
       ``(IV) previous assistance from the Administration to 
     provide services in Native American communities;
       ``(V) the proposed location for the Native American 
     business center, with priority given based on the proximity 
     of the center to the population being served and to achieve a 
     broad geographic dispersion of the centers; and
       ``(VI) demonstrated experience in providing technical 
     assistance, including financial, marketing, and management 
     assistance.

       ``(6) Conditions for participation.--Each eligible 
     applicant desiring a grant under this

[[Page S5444]]

     subsection shall submit an application to the Administrator 
     that contains--
       ``(A) a certification that the applicant--
       ``(i) is an eligible applicant;
       ``(ii) employs a full-time executive director, project 
     director, or program manager to manage the Native American 
     business center; and
       ``(iii) agrees--

       ``(I) to a site visit by the Administrator as part of the 
     final selection process;
       ``(II) to an annual programmatic and financial examination; 
     and
       ``(III) to the maximum extent practicable, to remedy any 
     problems identified pursuant to that site visit or 
     examination;

       ``(B) information demonstrating that the applicant has the 
     ability and resources to meet the needs, including cultural 
     needs, of the Native Americans to be served by the grant;
       ``(C) information relating to proposed assistance that the 
     grant will provide, including--
       ``(i) the number of individuals to be assisted; and
       ``(ii) the number of hours of counseling, training, and 
     workshops to be provided;
       ``(D) information demonstrating the effectiveness and 
     experience of the applicant in--
       ``(i) conducting financial, management, and marketing 
     assistance programs designed to educate or improve the 
     business skills of current or prospective Native American 
     business owners;
       ``(ii) providing training and services to a representative 
     number of Native Americans;
       ``(iii) using resource partners of the Administration and 
     other entities, including institutions of higher education, 
     Indian tribes, or tribal colleges; and
       ``(iv) the prudent management of finances and staffing;
       ``(E) the location at which the applicant will provide 
     training and services to Native Americans;
       ``(F) a 5-year plan that describes--
       ``(i) the number of Native Americans and Native American 
     small business concerns to be served by the grant;
       ``(ii) if the Native American business center is located in 
     the continental United States, the number of Native Americans 
     to be served by the grant; and
       ``(iii) the training and services to be provided to a 
     representative number of Native Americans; and
       ``(G) if the applicant is a joint project--
       ``(i) a certification that each participant in the joint 
     project is an eligible applicant;
       ``(ii) information demonstrating a record of commitment to 
     providing assistance to Native Americans; and
       ``(iii) information demonstrating that the participants in 
     the joint project have the ability and resources to meet the 
     needs, including the cultural needs, of the Native Americans 
     to be served by the grant.
       ``(7) Review of applications.--The Administrator shall 
     approve or disapprove each completed application submitted 
     under this subsection not later than 90 days after the date 
     on which the eligible applicant submits the application.
       ``(8) Program examination.--
       ``(A) In general.--Each Native American business center 
     established under this subsection shall annually provide to 
     the Administrator an itemized cost breakdown of actual 
     expenditures made during the preceding year.
       ``(B) Administration action.--Based on information received 
     under subparagraph (A), the Administration shall--
       ``(i) develop and implement an annual programmatic and 
     financial examination of each Native American business center 
     assisted pursuant to this subsection; and
       ``(ii) analyze the results of each examination conducted 
     under clause (i) to determine the programmatic and financial 
     viability of each Native American business center.
       ``(C) Conditions for continued funding.--In determining 
     whether to renew a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement 
     with a Native American business center, the Administration--
       ``(i) shall consider the results of the most recent 
     examination of the center under subparagraph (B), and, to a 
     lesser extent, previous examinations; and
       ``(ii) may withhold the renewal, if the Administrator 
     determines that--

       ``(I) the center has failed to provide the information 
     required to be provided under subparagraph (A), or the 
     information provided by the center is inadequate;
       ``(II) the center has failed to provide adequate 
     information required to be provided by the center for 
     purposes of the report of the Administrator under 
     subparagraph (E);
       ``(III) the center has failed to comply with a requirement 
     for participation in the Native American small business 
     development program, as determined by the Administrator, 
     including--

       ``(aa) failure to acquire or properly document a non-
     Federal contribution;
       ``(bb) failure to establish an appropriate partnership or 
     program for marketing and outreach to reach new Native 
     American small business concerns;
       ``(cc) failure to achieve results described in a financial 
     assistance agreement; and
       ``(dd) failure to provide to the Administrator a 
     description of the amount and sources of any non-Federal 
     funding received by the center;

       ``(IV) the center has failed to carry out the 5-year plan 
     under in paragraph (6)(F); or
       ``(V) the center cannot make the certification described in 
     paragraph (6)(A).

       ``(D) Continuing contract and cooperative agreement 
     authority.--
       ``(i) In general.--The authority of the Administrator to 
     enter into contracts or cooperative agreements in accordance 
     with this subsection shall be in effect for each fiscal year 
     only to the extent and in the amounts as are provided in 
     advance in appropriations Acts.
       ``(ii) Renewal.--After the Administrator has entered into a 
     contract or cooperative agreement with any Native American 
     business center under this subsection, the Administrator may 
     not suspend, terminate, or fail to renew or extend any such 
     contract or cooperative agreement unless the Administrator--

       ``(I) provides the center with written notification that 
     describes the reasons for the action of the Administrator; 
     and
       ``(II) affords the center an opportunity for a hearing, 
     appeal, or other administrative proceeding under chapter 5 of 
     title 5, United States Code.

       ``(E) Annual management report.--
       ``(i) In general.--The Administrator shall prepare and 
     submit to the Committee on Small Business and 
     Entrepreneurship and the Committee on Indian Affairs of the 
     Senate and the Committee on Small Business and the Committee 
     on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives an 
     annual report on the effectiveness of all projects conducted 
     by Native American business centers under this subsection and 
     any pilot programs administered by the Office of Native 
     American Affairs.
       ``(ii) Contents.--Each report submitted under clause (i) 
     shall include, with respect to each Native American business 
     center receiving financial assistance under this subsection--

       ``(I) the number of individuals receiving assistance from 
     the Native American business center;
       ``(II) the number of startup business concerns established 
     with the assistance of the Native American business center;
       ``(III) the number of existing businesses in the area 
     served by the Native American business center seeking to 
     expand employment;
       ``(IV) the number of jobs established or maintained, on an 
     annual basis, by Native American small business concerns 
     assisted by the center since receiving funding under this 
     section;
       ``(V) to the maximum extent practicable, the amount of the 
     capital investment and loan financing used by emerging and 
     expanding businesses that were assisted by a Native American 
     business center;
       ``(VI) any additional information on the counseling and 
     training program that the Administrator determines to be 
     necessary; and
       ``(VII) the most recent examination, as required under 
     subparagraph (B), and the determination made by the 
     Administration under that subparagraph.

       ``(9) Annual reports.--Each Native American business center 
     receiving financial assistance under this subsection shall 
     submit to the Administrator an annual report on the services 
     provided with the financial assistance, including--
       ``(A) the number of individuals assisted, by tribal 
     affiliation;
       ``(B) the number of hours spent providing counseling and 
     training for those individuals;
       ``(C) the number of startup small business concerns 
     established or maintained with the assistance of the Native 
     American business center;
       ``(D) the gross receipts of small business concerns 
     assisted by the Native American business center;
       ``(E) the number of jobs established or maintained by small 
     business concerns assisted by the Native American business 
     center; and
       ``(F) the number of jobs for Native Americans established 
     or maintained at small business concerns assisted by the 
     Native American business center.
       ``(10) Record retention.--
       ``(A) Applications.--The Administrator shall maintain a 
     copy of each application submitted under this subsection for 
     not less than 7 years.
       ``(B) Annual reports.--The Administrator shall maintain 
     copies of the certification submitted under paragraph (6)(A) 
     indefinitely.
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--
       ``(1) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out the Native American small business development 
     program $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2011 through 
     2013.
       ``(2) Administration.--Not more than 10 percent of funds 
     appropriated for a fiscal year may be used for the costs of 
     administering the programs under this section.''.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. UDALL of Colorado (for himself, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Bennet, 
        and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 3537. A bill to provide for certain land exchanges in Gunnison 
County, Colorado, and Uintah County, Utah; to the Committee on Energy 
and Natural Resources.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about 
legislation I am introducing, co-sponsored by Senators Bennett, Hatch, 
and Bennet of Colorado, to effectuate a relatively small land exchange 
involving

[[Page S5445]]

lands in Colorado and Utah. The exchange involves a private ranch, the 
U.S. Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service.
  In a nutshell, the private Bear Ranch in central/west Colorado is 
completely bisected by a narrow strip of BLM land, mostly 1/4 to 1/2 
mile wide, which is of limited public use due to its narrow 
configuration. The Bear Ranch would like to acquire the BLM strip in 
order to consolidate its ranch holdings for more efficient land, ranch 
and wildlife management, and to improve wildlife enhancement. There is 
also an issue of inadvertent trespass onto the Bear Ranch from the 
neighboring BLM land that would be eliminated by the Bear Ranch's 
acquisition of the BLM land strip.
  In return for the BLM land, the Bear Ranch has purchased or optioned 
two magnificent tracts of land in Colorado and Utah that would be added 
into the National Park System. The first is a 911 acre property near 
the shores of the heavily used Blue Mesa Reservoir in the Curecanti 
National Recreation Area outside of Gunnison, CO. This property has an 
important sage grouse habitat, superb views of both the Blue Mesa 
Reservoir and the spectacular Dillon Pinnacles, and an important elk 
and deer winter range. A portion of it might also be utilized for a 
future park visitor center.
  In Utah, the Bear Ranch has optioned 80 acres located inside Dinosaur 
National Monument. The so-called Orchid Draw property is about 1 mile 
west of the Monument's Quarry Visitor Center and is thought to contain 
rich dinosaur and vertebrate fossil resources. It is also within an 
area of special botanic interest, with nine sensitive plant species. 
The Park Service has been trying to acquire this property for a long 
time.
  There are several other special features of our legislation which 
deserve special mention.
  First, the Bear Ranch will place a permanent conservation status on 
all the land it acquires from the BLM which will limit future use of 
the land to ranching, wildlife conservation, open space and 
recreational purposes only.
  Second, the BLM land will be appraised at its full market value 
before the conservation easement is put in place so that the U.S. 
taxpayers will get full value for the land they convey to the Bear 
Ranch.
  Third, if the land Bear Ranch conveys to the Park Service appraises 
higher than the BLM land, the Bear Ranch will forego any cash 
equalization payment which might otherwise be due from the U.S., and 
will instead donate the excess value to the U.S.
  Fourth, the Bear Ranch has committed to donate up to $250,000 for new 
trail, trailhead and other outdoor recreational improvements in the 
vicinity of the land exchange in order to improve public access and 
enhance recreational opportunities on nearby Forest Service and BLM 
lands. Exactly where, and how, those funds will be used will be 
determined by BLM and Forest Service planning that is currently 
underway.
  Our legislation has received the support of the local county and town 
governments of jurisdiction in both Colorado and Utah, and from 
numerous environmental, conservation, recreation, historic and natural 
preservation organizations. Those include Gunnison County. CO, Uintah 
County, UT, the City of Gunnison, CO, City of Vernal, UT, the Nature 
Conservancy, National Parks & Conservation Association, Thunder 
Mountain Wheelers, Intermountain Natural History Association, and 
several others.
  The bill also effectuates another small land for right of way 
exchange near Marble, CO, in order to facilitate a proposed small 
hydroelectric project and to acquire a new public trailhead to access 
the popular Maroon Bells-Snowmass Wilderness Area. That exchange is 
endorsed by the Aspen Valley Land Trust, Holy Cross Electric 
Association, a rural electric cooperative, the Town of Marble, CO and 
Gunnison County, CO, among others.
  In summary, this legislation represents a true ``win-win'' for both 
the general public and numerous local communities. I thank my 
colleagues, Senators Bennett, Hatch, and Bennet for joining me in 
sponsoring the bill, and for Congressmen John Salazar, Jim Matheson and 
Mike Thompson for introducing an identical bill in the House. I am 
looking forward to the Senate's expeditious consideration and approval 
so that it can become law this year.
                                 ______
                                 
      By Mr. BOND (for himself and Mr. Hatch):
  S. 3538. A bill to improve the cyber security of the United States 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Homeland Security and 
Government Affairs.
  Mr. BOND. Mr. President, over the past several months, our Homeland 
has experienced direct terrorist attacks against two military bases and 
attempted terrorist attacks on Christmas Day and in Times Square. These 
attacks quickly captured the attention of the American public and stand 
as stark reminders of the threats our Nation continues to face from 
terrorists across the globe.
  After these recent attacks, I have no doubt that every American is 
aware of the threat from a terrorist with a bomb, which could take out 
a city block or bring down an airplane. But I am afraid that right now, 
the American public is largely unaware of a silent threat that could 
devastate our entire Nation--cyber attacks.
  These cyber attacks happen every day, but have remained largely under 
the public radar. Our government, businesses, citizens, and even social 
networking sites all have been hit. Cyber attacks are on the rise and 
unless our private sector and Congress start down a better path to 
protect our information networks, serious damage to our economy and our 
national security will follow.
  In an ever-increasing cyber age, where our financial system conducts 
trades via the Internet, families pay bills online, and the government 
uses computers to calculate benefits and implement war strategies, 
successful cyber attacks can be devastating. The nightmare scenarios no 
longer exist just in Hollywood movies. Imagine if a terrorist disrupted 
our air traffic control on an average day with more than 28,000 
commercial aircraft in our skies; if a hacker took down Wall Street 
trading for just hours; or if an attack destroyed an electrical grid in 
a major city.
  Scenarios like these make it even more important that we listen to 
the recent comments by former Director of National Intelligence Mike 
McConnell who testified that ``[i]f we were in a cyber war today, the 
United States would lose.'' That is no insignificant statement coming 
from a military and intelligence veteran like Mike McConnell and it 
should cause all of us to pause and take a look at how we should 
neutralize this rising threat. Our networks and way of life could be 
taken down by an enemy state, a terrorist group, or a single hacker. 
That is why Senator Hatch and I are introducing the National Cyber 
Infrastructure Protection Act of 2010 today.
  Let me be blunt here: our enemies won't wait for us to do our 
homework, solve our turf battles, or modernize our laws before using 
our networks as a deadly weapon; in fact, the attacks have already 
started. We do not have another day to waste, and I believe our bill is 
the best solution to address this threat.
  This act is built on three principles: first, we must be clear about 
where Congress should, and, more importantly, should not legislate. 
Congress should set lanes in the road to protect our Nation's cyber 
security, but leave flexibility for the private sector and government 
to adapt to changing threats within those lanes.
  In 1978, when the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act was enacted, 
it put into law certain technologies. Those technologies changed and 
thus FISA was ineffective in enabling us to listen in on cell phone and 
e-mail traffic between terrorists in foreign countries.
  We have seen within the past few years the national security problems 
that can arise when laws are too rigid to keep pace with technology. We 
have also heard repeated concerns from industry, the private sector, 
and those operating critical infrastructure that overlegislating by 
Congress ultimately will make it harder to protect our networks as 
innovation and quick response get overrun by unnecessary regulatory 
schemes and mandates.
  Second, right now virtually every Federal department or agency has

[[Page S5446]]

someone who is responsible for cyber security issues. But who makes 
sure that all those departments and agencies work together to protect 
all of our government networks? Who is the one person responsible, with 
authority to impact our cyber security strategies and activities? 
Unfortunately, right now, the answer is ``no one.''
  To solve this problem, our bill establishes a National Cyber Center 
and designates a single, Senate-confirmed individual, accountable to 
the Congress and the American people and reporting directly to the 
President, to serve as the Director. The Director has the statutory 
responsibility and authority to coordinate activities to protect 
government networks and develop policies and procedures to help Federal 
agencies do the job.
  In order to reduce the center's operating costs and to capitalize on 
the cyber expertise we all know resides in the Department of Defense, 
the National Cyber Center is administratively placed in DOD. But, out 
of deference to concerns that the military should not have too much 
control over government networks, the center is not run by the Defense 
Department and the Director does not report to the Secretary of 
Defense.
  Because a key part of the center is to make sure the right people are 
talking to each other, the act requires those parts of DOD, the 
Department of Homeland Security, the Office of the Director of National 
Intelligence, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation needed to carry 
out the center's missions to collocate and integrate within the center, 
much like the National Counterterrorism Center integrates elements of 
the intelligence community. Other Federal agencies may also participate 
in the center.
  As we put this bill together, former senior intelligence community 
officials told us that providing strong budget authority was essential 
for the Director to have the clout needed to do the job. And so, this 
act gives the Director clear input into cyber budgets across all 
Federal agencies, much like the Federal drug czar has in coordinating 
counterdrug budgets across different agencies. To hit this point home, 
the act also creates a National Cyber Security Program, similar to the 
National Intelligence Program. Such influence--influence that the 
current cyber czar simply does not have--is essential to creating a 
comprehensive, cost-effective approach to securing our government 
information networks.
  The third and final principle underlying this act is the idea that 
there must be a venue for the government and the private sector to 
collaborate and share information on cyber-related matters. The private 
sector is often on the front lines of cyber attacks, so any information 
it can provide to increase government awareness of the source and 
nature of cyber threats will make both government and the private 
sector stronger. The corollary to this is that the Government must 
share its own cyber threat information, including classified or 
declassified intelligence, with the private sector.
  Moreover, this collaboration, in order to be effective, must be 
voluntary. Once the private sector stands to gain technical advice and 
greater access to cyber threat information, there will be a clear 
incentive to join with the government in protecting our networks.
  Our bill codifies this collaboration, creating a public-private 
partnership known as the Cyber Defense Alliance to facilitate the flow 
of information about cyber threats and the latest technologies between 
the private sector and the government. The Alliance will be the 
clearinghouse for passing sensitive cyber threat information to the 
private and critical infrastructure entities on the front lines, but 
without compromising our intelligence sources and methods.
  We agree with intelligence experts and private sector representatives 
who have told us if the heavy hand of government drives this 
collaboration, it will not be effective. Therefore, the alliance will 
be managed by a board of directors consisting largely of private sector 
representatives and located in the Department of Energy, where the 
existing National Labs have great expertise to share. Because our 
private partners must know the information will not be compromised or 
other consequences will occur, the act gives solid protections from 
FOIA, antitrust restrictions, and other limitations.
  This bill is one of many cyber-bills introduced in Congress, so some 
may be asking why this approach is better.
  A key aspect of this bill is that it provides a practical public-
private cyber infrastructure designed to address effectively the cyber 
threat rather than preserve the jurisdictional turf of any one agency 
or congressional oversight committee. In other words--I don't have a 
dog in this fight--I just want to pass the best bill to protect our 
networks. The cyber threat will only be eliminated when we get all of 
the public and private players working together in harmony under a 
common vision toward common mission objectives.
  Our bill does not impose mandates on industry and the private 
sector--mandates and regulations that form the core of other bills, 
raising substantial concerns among our industry and private sector 
partners. Our economy is in turmoil as it is and the last thing we need 
are mandates imposed on U.S. businesses that will put them at a serious 
competitive disadvantage and jeopardize their proprietary information 
in the global marketplace. Many industry partners have told us that if 
we mandate this it would put them at a competitive disadvantage.
  Finally, our bill moves away from the notion that creating a 
statutory cyber coordinator in the Executive Office of the President 
will solve the cyber security problem. The current cyber security 
coordinator in the White House has neither the authority nor the staff 
to coordinate the government's wide-range of cyber operations and 
strategies. Simply enshrining his position in statute will not overcome 
the claims of ``Executive Privilege'' that are bound to come when 
Congress asks for information and it will not guarantee the leadership 
necessary to address the cyber threat.
  Also, I think many of my colleagues would agree that now is not the 
time to give the Department of Homeland Security more responsibility, 
as some of the cyber bills out there want to do. I don't think many in 
this Chamber would disagree that DHS is already overburdened.
  The bill we are introducing today has already earned praise from the 
electric power sector because of the cooperative relationship that the 
Cyber Defense Alliance created in this bill fosters between the 
government and private sector. The entities that are part of the 
electric power sector recognize that this bill builds on what is 
already working and creates the infrastructure necessary to ensure a 
cooperative relationship between all of the relevant public and private 
cyber players to address the evolving cyber-security threat. I ask 
unanimous consent that this statement from the electric power sector be 
made a part of the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

        The National Cyber Infrastructure Protection Act of 2010

       Protecting the North American electric grid and ensuring a 
     reliable supply of power is the electric power industry's top 
     priority. Reliability is more than a buzzword for the 
     electric industry--it's a mandate. In fact, electric 
     companies can be assessed substantial penalties for failure 
     to comply with reliability standards.
       This focus on reliability, resiliency and recovery requires 
     the power sector to take an all-hazards approach, recognizing 
     risks from natural phenomena such as hurricanes or 
     geomagnetic disturbances to intentional cyber attacks. The 
     electric power sector works closely with the North American 
     Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) and federal agencies 
     to enhance the cyber security of the bulk power system. This 
     includes coordination with the Federal Energy Regulatory 
     Commission (FERC), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 
     and the Department of Energy (DOE), as well as federal 
     intelligence and law enforcement agencies, and various 
     federal and provincial authorities in Canada.
       To complement its cyber security efforts and to address 
     rapidly changing intelligence on evolving threats, the 
     industry welcomes a cooperative relationship with federal 
     authorities to protect against situations that threaten 
     national security or public welfare, and to prioritize the 
     assets that need enhanced security. A well-practiced, public-
     private partnership utilizes all stakeholders' expertise, 
     including the government's ability to gather and share timely 
     and actionable threat information with critical 
     infrastructure asset owners and operators, upon which they 
     can formulate appropriate mitigation strategies to prevent 
     significant adverse consequences to utility operations or 
     assets.

[[Page S5447]]

     The comprehensive draft cyber security legislation under 
     development in the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence 
     attempts to create such a cooperative relationship by: * * *

  Mr. BOND. In addition, because, the vice chairman of the Intelligence 
Committee, believe no legislation in this area should impede the 
intelligence community's ability to protect our nation from terrorist 
attacks and other threats, we asked the Office of the Director of 
National Intelligence for an informal assessment of our bill. They told 
us that, unlike other bills that have been introduced, this bill 
protects intelligence community equities, especially with respect to 
protecting classified intelligence sources and methods.
  The National Cyber Infrastructure Protection Act of 2010 provides 
broad lanes in the road, without micromanaging, to give all partners in 
cyber security, whether government or private, the flexibility to 
defend against threats from our enemies. The private sector already has 
a tremendous incentive to protect their own networks; all the Federal 
Government needs to do is support them with technology and information 
and get out of the way.
  Cyber attackers have been stealing intellectual property, threatening 
to take down our critical infrastructure, and gaining insight into our 
national security networks. The longer Congress waits to act, the more 
our vulnerability to these attacks increases. The National Cyber 
Infrastructure Protection Act will put the Government, our critical 
infrastructure companies, and the private sector on the right path to 
securing our networks. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting 
this important legislation.
  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, today I rise to express my support as a 
cosponsor of the National Cyber Infrastructure Protection Act. At long 
last, our Nation is finally recognizing the increasing danger posed by 
cyber threats and the devastating disruption that they can cause 
because of the interdependent nature of information systems that 
support our Nation's critical infrastructure.
  As a Nation, we must develop a strategy that provides a strategic 
framework to prevent cyber attacks against America's critical 
infrastructures. As a government, we must reduce national vulnerability 
to cyber attacks and minimize the damage and recovery time from cyber 
attacks should they occur. I believe that the legislation that my 
colleague from Missouri and I are introducing today will provide a sure 
foundation to put our Nation on a path to begin to address cyber 
vulnerabilities.
  The challenge to protect cyberspace is vast and complex and 
ultimately requires the efforts of the entire government. As a Nation, 
we must recognize that cyber threats are multi-faceted and global in 
nature. These threats operate in an environment that rapidly changes. 
The sharing of information between government and the private sector is 
crucial to our overall national and economic viability.
  Last January, McAfee issued a report that concluded that the use of 
cyber attacks as a strategic weapon by governments and political 
organizations is on the rise. The U.S. is the most targeted nation in 
the world--and our military, government, and private sector systems are 
often attacked with impunity. Our Nation has experienced large-scale 
malicious cyber intrusions from individuals, groups and nations. These 
attacks have dramatically increased in number and complexity.
  Just last year, Google and over 30 other companies linked to our 
energy, finance, defense, technology and media sectors fell prey to 
costly cyber attacks. Too many nations either directly sanction this 
activity or give it tacit approval by failing to investigate or 
prosecute the perpetrators. Many of the major incidents are presently 
coming out of Russia and China.
  The National Cyber Infrastructure Protection Act would establish a 
National Cyber Center, housed within the Department of Defense. The 
mission of the National Cyber Center would be to serve as the primary 
organization for coordinating Federal Government defensive operations, 
cyber intelligence collection and analysis, and activities to protect 
and defend Federal Government information networks. Critical in 
achieving this mission would be the sharing of information between the 
private sector and federal agencies regarding cyber threats. This 
center would be led by a Senate-confirmed director modeled after the 
Director of National Intelligence position. The director reports 
directly to the President and would coordinate cyber activities to 
protect and defend Federal Government information networks. The 
director would serve as the President's principal adviser on such 
matters and developing policies for securing Federal Government 
information networks.
  In our Nation today, over 3/4 of our Nation's critical infrastructure 
is under the control of the private sector. One such example is smart 
grid technology for power grids. The Smart Grid will use automated 
meters, two-way communications and advanced sensors to improve 
electricity efficiency and reliability. The nation's utilities have 
embraced the concept and are installing millions of automated meters on 
homes across the country. However, cyber security experts have 
determined that some types of meters can be hacked. As we rely on 
technology developed by private industry, we must ensure that we harden 
this technology against threats that could leave our citizens 
vulnerable.
  The opening salvos of future conflicts will be launched in 
cyberspace. In 2008, we saw this occur when Russian forces launched a 
cyber attack on Georgian defense and information networks. The Russians 
essentially blinded the Georgian military during the South Ostessia 
conflict. Our reliance on technology and integrated networks certainly 
makes our military and critical infrastructure more efficient. However, 
that efficiency can have its price in the form of cyber vulnerability.
  As Americans, we must be prepared to fight back should we be 
attacked. We must also harden our networks against the tools that 
criminals use to steal a person's identity and a company's trade 
secrets. These are the same tools that today can and will be used by 
terrorists in the future to attack and erode our infrastructure and 
defense systems. The stakes are too high and the risks are too grave to 
delay. If we don't move now to protect our national cyber 
infrastructure, the consequences to our economy, security and citizens 
could be dire. This is a fight we must win. The only way to win is to 
be prepared.

                          ____________________