Congressional Record, Volume 156 Issue 132 (Tuesday, September 28, 2010)

[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 132 (Tuesday, September 28, 2010)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7620-S7635]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr.
Bennett, Mr. Corker, Ms. Collins, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Alexander,
and Mr. Chambliss):
S. 11. A bill to restore the application of the 340B drug discount
program to orphan drugs with respect to children's hospitals; to the
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts. Mr. President, I come to the floor today
to speak about a bill that I am introducing today along with several of
my Senate colleagues. My bill protects the lives of the most vulnerable
among us our Nation's children by ensuring children's hospitals across
the country are able to purchase orphan drugs at a discount.
I am pleased to be joined by my colleagues: Senators Snow, Bennett,
Corker, Collins, Voinovich, Alexander, and Chambliss today, to stand
together to provide for and protect the ability of children's hospitals
to access medicines for their patients at a reduced price.
As my colleagues are aware, access to orphan drugs are critically
important to children, many of whom, if they are ill, suffer from rare
disease or conditions. Orphan drugs, by definition, are designed and
developed to help and treat diseases or conditions that affect fewer
than 200,000 people, many of whom are children. On a daily basis, the
Children's Hospital of Boston uses most of the 347 medicines that are
designated orphan drugs.
The bill my colleagues and I are introducing today restores and
protects the ability for children's hospitals to access those
outpatient medicines through the 340B drug discount program authorized
in the Public Health Services Act. Access to this program and the
corresponding discount saves the Children's Hospital of Boston nearly
$3 million annually, but more importantly, Children's Hospital of
Boston is able to save lives as a result. Hospitals and doctors at
children's hospitals are able to access life-saving medicines, children
live better lives, and families are given a piece of mind.
Passing this bill quickly is the right thing to do and I encourage
the Senate to act swiftly to enact my legislation to ensure that
children's hospitals can once again receive discounted pricing on these
life-saving medicines.

[[Page S7621]]

There is no cause for delay. The House has passed this restorative
language twice already. The Senate needs to do the same.
I believe quick passage is possible quick passage should be possible
because of the support and efforts that I have seen demonstrated by my
fellow Senators.
Senator Sherrod Brown has been a thoughtful leader on this issue and
I respect and admire him for his work. Because of his leadership and
perseverance, he was able to secure the support of sixteen Democratic
Senators in favor of this legislation, all of whom signed a letter to
the Majority Leader, expressing their support to restore access to this
very important program.
I am hopeful that Senator Sherrod Brown and I can continue to work
across party lines and with all of our colleagues to reach agreement
and find resolution on this.
My door is always open to my colleagues who are willing to work
together to solve common problems. In this instance, our Nation's
children deserve that we come together and protect their access to
medicines that will save their lives.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and
letters of support be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:

S. 11

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

SECTION 1. CONTINUED INCLUSION OF ORPHAN DRUGS IN DEFINITION
OF COVERED OUTPATIENT DRUGS WITH RESPECT TO
CHILDREN'S HOSPITALS UNDER THE 340B DRUG
DISCOUNT PROGRAM.

(a) Amendment.--Subsection (e) of section 340B of the
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 256b) is amended by
striking ``covered entities described in subparagraph (M)''
and inserting ``covered entities described in subparagraph
(M) (other than a children's hospital described in
subparagraph (M))''.
(b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a)
shall take effect as if included in the enactment of section
2302 of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of
2010 (Public Law 111-152).
____

U.S. Senate,

Washington, DC, August 5, 2010.
Hon. Harry Reid,
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Majority Leader Reid: We are writing to ask that a
technical correction to Section 2302 of the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act (HCERA) be provided at the
earliest opportunity. The Section exempted orphan drugs from
required discounts for newly eligible entities added to the
340B statute under the Act. PPS-exempt children's hospitals
were included among these entities, when in fact they were
already eligible for and participating in the 340B program.
Since the HCERA provision was effective upon enactment, it
is imperative that a retroactive correction be made as soon
as possible. Both the House and Senate have included this
correction in various pieces of legislation, but none of
these bills have been signed into law. We thank you for your
efforts to date to fix this problem and respectfully ask for
your continued help in ensuring another legislative vehicle
for the prompt passage of a technical correction restoring
the children's hospitals' ability to fully participate in the
340B drug discount program.
Children's hospitals use on a daily basis most of the 347
drugs that have received orphan drug status. The hospitals
participating in the 340B drug discount program have achieved
significant savings. They estimate that those savings would
be reduced dramatically with the orphan drug exemption. If
the exemption is not corrected, the children's hospitals will
have to pay wholesale prices for these drugs or leave the
340B program.
We would appreciate your continued support to ensure that
children's hospitals do not lose the critical benefit
provided by the 340B program.
Sincerely,
Sherrod Brown; John F. Kerry; Joseph I. Lieberman; ------
; Al Franken; Amy Klobuchar; Mary L. Landrieu; Debbie
Stabenow; Maria Cantwell; Kirsten E. Gillibrand;
Christopher J. Dodd; Robert P. Casey, Jr.; Carl Levin;
Dianne Feinstein; Herb Kohl; Arlen Specter; Barbara
Boxer.
____

Children's Hospital Boston,

Boston, MA, August 24, 2010.
Senator Scott Brown,
Russell Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Brown: We write with urgency to request your
leadership on a pressing issue facing Children's Hospital
Boston. An unintentional error in the Health Care Education
and Reconciliation Act (HCERA) is threatening children's
hospitals access to discounts on orphan drugs through the
drug discount program authorized under section 340B of the
Public Health Service Act.
The 340B program allows a number of safety net providers to
purchase outpatient pharmaceuticals at discounted rates,
thereby expanding access to care to low income and vulnerable
populations. The program saves Children's Hospital Boston
between $1.5 and $3 million annually and is of no cost to the
government. Participation in this program has made it
possible for the hospital to control costs in a challenging
environment and ensure patient access to outpatient drugs,
such as Botox (used to reduce spasticity in patients with
cerebral palsy and other neurological disorders) and
Rituximab (used to treat non-Hodgkins lymphoma and to
alleviate the effects of severe juvenile arthritis).
Children's hospitals were included in the 340B program
through an amendment to Medicaid in the Deficit Reduction Act
of 2005. Federal guidance enabling them to enroll in the
program was finally published in September 2009, and 25
children hospitals, including Children's Hospital Boston, are
now participating. The Patient Protection & Affordable Care
Act (PPACA) added some new types of hospitals as eligible
entities to the 340B statute and also included the children's
hospitals so that they would be subject to same regulatory
requirements as other eligible providers. When HCERA amended
the PPACA with a last minute provision exempting orphan drugs
from discounts received by all of the newly eligible
providers, children's hospitals were unfortunately included,
even though they were already eligible for and participating
in the 34013 program.
Without a technical correction restoring 340B discounts for
orphan drugs, Children's Hospital Boston is facing the loss
of most of its savings from the 340B program and the choice
of either leaving the program or paying wholesale prices for
orphan drugs. Orphan drugs, i.e. drugs developed to treat a
disease that afflicts relatively few, are widely used in
children's hospitals, given their role in caring for the
sickest children with the most complex health care needs. In
addition, orphan drugs may also be used more widely in
treating other diseases or conditions. Indeed, Children's
Hospital Boston currently uses most of the 347 drugs with
orphan drug status on a daily basis.
The Massachusetts Biotechnology Council (MassBio), which
represents more than 600 biotechnology companies,
universities and academic institutions dedicated to advancing
cutting edge research, urges a correction to this problem. As
you likely know, the focus of MassBio is to foster an
environment in the state where biotechnology companies can
succeed. For MassBio, as well as the member companies, true
success means that research and development leads to
treatments that reach the most vulnerable patients in our
state. As such, it is critical that institutions like
Children's Hospital Boston have ready access to the
pharmaceuticals they need to treat seriously ill children.
As the months pass and denials of discounts for orphan
drugs begin, we are gravely concerned about the cost impact
of this mistake on Children's Hospital Boston. The hospital
employs more than 8,000 people, treats thousands of very sick
children annually and is the safety-net provider for
Massachusetts children. Children's has worked diligently in
coordination with insurers and others in the industry to
reduce health care costs and improve efficiency.
Without immediate legislative action, Children's Hospital
Boston will be forced to withdraw from this cost saving,
health care enhancing program. As leaders in the
Massachusetts health care industry and partners in improving
community health, we ask you to take a leadership role in the
correction of the issue. Corrective language was included in
the two tax extenders bills that passed in the House.
However, the language, while uncontroversial, has not been
included in any legislation that has passed the Senate.
We hope that you will agree to serve as an original
cosponsor of the legislation drafted by Senator Sherrod Brown
(attached) and contact the Majority and Minority leadership
in the Senate to insist that this issue not be tied up in
politics.
Sincerely,
James Mandell, MD,
CEO, Children's Hospital Boston.
Robert K. Coughlin,
President & CEO, MassBio.
______

By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Casey, Mr. Brown of
Ohio, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Burris, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Leahy, Mr.
Menendez, Mr. Reed, Mr. Dodd, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. Schumer, and Mr.
Lautenberg):
S. 3849. A bill to extend the Emergency Contingency Fund for State
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Program, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to support
extending a critically needed program that provides hope to 250,000 of
our poorest families.
I am joined by Senators Durbin, Casey, Sherrod Brown, Bingaman,
Burris, Harkin, Leahy, Boxer, Menendez, Reed and Dodd in offering the
Job

[[Page S7622]]

Preservation for Parents in Poverty Act, which simply provides a 3-
month extension of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF,
Emergency Contingency Fund. The $500 million in funding needed to pay
for this extension is offset with corresponding reductions to the
regular TANF Contingency Fund in fiscal year 2012.
We have suffered through the worst recession since the great
depression. Just this month, the Census Bureau reported that nearly 44
million Americans--1 in 7--lived in poverty last year. This represents
the largest number of Americans living in poverty since the Census
Bureau began keeping these statistics 51 years ago.
The TANF Emergency Fund was created as part of the Recovery Act
enacted last year to provide temporary, targeted, emergency spending
that combats the recession by helping to create jobs for our poorest
families. It gave States funds to subsidize jobs for low-income parents
and older youth and to provide basic cash assistance and short-term
benefits to the increasing numbers of poor families with children. It
addresses the emergency needs of low-income families that are
struggling in the recession.
At least 36 States have used TANF Emergency Contingency Funds to
create or expand subsidized employment programs. States have used this
fund to create subsidized jobs in the private and public sectors during
the depth of the recession. By the time it expires at the end of
September, the fund will have created approximately 250,000 jobs for
low-income Americans who would otherwise be unemployed. Nearly all of
these jobs will be eliminated if the program is not extended with
additional funds.
If this worthy program is allowed to end on Thursday, these States
will no longer be able to use the TANF Emergency Fund to subsidize
employment and provide basic cash assistance to struggling families to
help with housing and heating bills, domestic violence services, and
transportation costs. This will hurt our economy because families on
TANF have to spend nearly all of the money they receive to meet their
basic needs. This will reduce demand for the goods and services,
particularly in low-income communities.
Massachusetts relies on the TANF Emergency Contingency Fund to
maintain the key existing safety net programs for cash assistance,
emergency housing, rental vouchers, employment and training services,
child care, and other initiatives to support low-income families
getting back to work.
In Massachusetts, the Emergency Fund is used to provide TANF cash
assistance to more than 50,000 low-income families in the Bay State
each month. To qualify for this assistance, a family of three must have
income less than $1,069 a month. Let me repeat that. To qualify for
this assistance a family of three must have income of less than $1,069
a month. The maximum cash grant they can receive from the state is just
$578 a month. Massachusetts also uses the fund to provide emergency
shelter and related services to 3,000 homeless families.
An extension of the TANF Emergency Fund would provide Massachusetts
with federal assistance to accommodate the 10 percent TANF caseload
increase we have experienced since the start of the recession. It would
enable the State to preserve and maintain critical services for our
poorest citizens during these difficult economic times.
If Congress does not immediately act, tens of thousands of jobs will
be lost. Businesses will lose access to critical employment support
programs, and the lives of our poorest families will be made even more
difficult.
Extending the TANF Emergency Contingency Fund is a common-sense
policy that enjoys broad support from public officials, private
experts, and bipartisan organizations, including: Mark Zandi, Chief
Economist at Moody's Analytics; the National Governors Association; the
National Conference of State Legislators; the American Public Human
Services Association; and the National Association of State TANF
Administrators. I ask all my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise to speak about a piece of
legislation just introduced, S. 3849, the Job Preservation for Parents
in Poverty Act, which is simply an extension of a program that has
placed tens of thousands of people into jobs in this recession and is
working. We want to make sure it is extended because of how effective
it has been to help people find and keep jobs. This legislation is
fully offset. I wish to spend a couple minutes talking about the
provisions that make it so effective.
First, I thank a number of Senators who have led the fight--Senator
Kerry, as well as our assistant majority leader, Senator Durbin, for
the work they have done, as well as others--and for the testimony we
received from people across the country. I know in my case one person
who spent a good deal of time making it clear to me and to others
across southern Pennsylvania and even across the State about the
effectiveness of this program was Mayor Nutter of Philadelphia who,
like any mayor in the country in the middle of a recession, doesn't
have the luxury of dealing with programs that don't work. He can only
support and endorse programs that are working to create jobs. In a city
such as Philadelphia, which still has a high unemployment rate, Mayor
Nutter has relied upon this program, which is a rapid attachment effort
to create jobs and keep people in those jobs.
We know the unemployment rates are intolerably too high. In our State
we have 585,000 people out of work, just about 9.5 percent
unemployment. Our poverty figures are going through the roof at the
same time. We are seeing, in short, the real impact of this horrific
recession.
One of the best ways to deal with that crisis is to have an extension
of an important program that we refer to in Pennsylvania as the
Pennsylvania Way to Work Program. It is helping keep people out of
poverty and providing people with jobs; in this case, 12,000 people in
Pennsylvania. I could go down the list of other States as well, but I
won't. In our State, 12,864 adults have been helped by this program as
well as summer youth, more than 7,800, for a total of 20,718.
It is fully offset. If we don't extend it, in many, if not most,
States, these programs will be shut down. It is working. It is not only
creating jobs, it is keeping people out of poverty because they are
working. I would think everyone would want to support programs that are
working and keeping people out of poverty.
It is critically important that we extend the program. I am grateful
for the help our assistant majority leader, Senator Durbin, has
provided.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania for speaking out for this important program. I know
there are many jobs in his State which are at stake with this decision
by the Senate. There are some 26,000 jobs in Illinois that hinge on a
decision made by the Senate as to whether we extend this program. What
we are discussing this afternoon gets down to the heart of the
question: Will we do everything in our power to help Americans find
work, particularly those who have struggled so hard in the past? Will
we give them a chance to continue working in many instances or to find
work? It is an important choice.
Here we have a stark example of this choice in the fate of a program
called the TANF Emergency Contingency Fund. In my State, we call this
program Put Illinois to Work. It helps States subsidize the cost of
hiring workers in mostly private sector jobs.
This small program has had a huge impact in Illinois. Nearly 250,000
jobs have been created in 37 States. It is a program that everyone of
both political parties should support. Rather than paying people to do
nothing, this program helps private companies hire the employees they
need but can't quite afford. Yet Republicans, at least to this point,
are saying we should not extend this program past this Thursday. The
end of this program in my State means the loss of thousands of jobs. I
think the only reason there is opposition to this is the fact that it
was originally conceived and offered to the Senate in the President's
Recovery Act.
Though many on the other side of the aisle have taken a party-line
position

[[Page S7623]]

that they will oppose that act no matter what it did is unfortunate,
particularly for people who are just trying to find a way to survive in
a very tough economy. Many of them earn $10 an hour. These are not jobs
on which one could get rich. They can survive on these jobs. We are
trying to make sure these people have an opportunity to survive. This
is a stimulus that works. Who would argue with the concept or premise
that putting people to work is a lot better than paying them to do
nothing?
Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts has a simple bill that would
extend the jobs program by 3 months, but it is fully paid for by
reducing the TANF program's future budget. The argument that it adds to
the deficit does not work. It doesn't add to the deficit. It is paid
for by future budgetary commitments. I am afraid that still we will
find an objection from the other side of the aisle. They have objected
to continuing this program on the continuing resolution which more or
less keeps government in business while we are in recess.
Mr. President, 26,000 jobs are at stake in Illinois, and losing that
many jobs would hurt my State. We already have an unemployment rate of
over 10 percent. Governor Pat Quinn is trying to figure out how to save
some of these jobs, but it is difficult with the budgetary problems we
face in the State capital. It is not just Illinois that would suffer;
110,000 jobs would be lost in States represented by Republican
Senators: 40,000 in Texas, which is represented by two Republican
Senators; 20,000 in Georgia, represented by two Republican Senators;
10,000 in Kentucky, 10,000 people who will lose work this week in
Kentucky represented by the minority leader. It is unfortunate that we
have allowed some of these ideological positions to get in the way. It
makes no difference that over 110,000 constituents represented by those
on the other side of the aisle will be impacted by this objection.
I am afraid at this point some of our partisan differences are going
to cost a lot of innocent people a chance to bring home a paycheck. I
don't think that is what the American people want in Washington. I
think what they are looking for us to do is to extend this program and
save a quarter million Americans from losing their jobs.
I don't know if Senator Kerry is coming to the Senate floor, but I
see some Members on the Republican side of the aisle. I will make the
unanimous consent request at this point.
I ask unanimous consent that the Finance Committee be discharged from
further consideration of S. 3849, the Job Preservation for Parents in
Poverty Act; that the Senate then proceed to its consideration; that
the bill be read three times, passed, and the motion to reconsider be
laid upon the table; and that any statements relating to the measure be
printed in the Record.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, and I will
object, the majority has known this program was going to expire at the
end of this month all year and has taken no steps to reauthorize this
important social safety net program. We are also in the position of
having to pass an extension of TANF. I am not sure the Senator from
Illinois is aware that the chairman and ranking member of the Finance
Committee have put together a bipartisan 1-year extension of TANF. I
object.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.
______

By Mr. REID (for Mrs. Lincoln):
S. 3850. A bill to amend the Toxic Substances Control Act to clarify
the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency with respect to
certain sporting good articles, and to exempt those articles from a
definition under that Act; to the Committee on Environment and Public
Works.
Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill which
will protect the great American traditions of hunting, fishing, and
recreational shooting from actions that will drive up the costs of
participation and directly impact employment across the country.
Recently, extremist groups have filed a petition with the U.S. EPA to
prohibit the use of lead in the manufacturing of ammunition and fishing
tackle. This effort would not only drive up the cost of ammunition and
fishing tackle, but would, as a direct result, drive down the number of
people able to participate in these activities and directly hurt the
millions of Americans who depend on the hunting, fishing, and shooting
industries for part of their livelihoods.
Hunters and anglers are ardent conservationists and have proven
themselves willing to consider lead alternatives when the data
justifies it. For instance, since 1991, waterfowl hunters have been
required to use non-lead ammunition to protect waterfowl species which
have been scientifically proven to be vulnerable to exposure. However,
EPA found in 1994 no scientific basis to proceed with a lead ban in
fishing tackle. EPA rightly and quickly rejected the petition with
regard to ammunition, stating that they did not have the authority to
regulate ammunition under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
However, EPA is still considering a ban on lead fishing tackle. This
ban would drive up costs on a sport that's appeal lies in its
simplicity and accessibility to the broad American public. Lead sinkers
are critical to both salt and freshwater anglers, and are frequently
used in the types of fishing that attracts young people to this sport.
Moreover, a ban such as this would be a blow to thousands of people
who depend on fishing tackle and ammunition manufacturing for their
livelihoods. Companies like Remington in Lonoke, Arkansas employ over
20,000 Arkansans. The 5,500 manufacturers of firearms and ammunition
and almost one million people working in sport fishing do not need EPA
taking aim at their industry.
My bill simply clarifies that the components used in manufacturing
shells, cartridges, and fishing tackle are exempt from EPA regulation
under the Toxic Substances Control Act. Taking this simple step will
provide certainty to these critical industries and prevent EPA and
activist litigators from dragging this issue out through the courts for
years.
I am confident that the sporting community will continue to work with
the Fish and Wildlife Service and State Fish and Wildlife agencies to
address issues around lead ammunition where and when the facts warrant
it. But Congress must act to preserve our hunting and fishing
traditions by ensuring access to affordable, vital tools our hunters
and anglers rely on.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3850

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 ``Hunting, Fishing and
Recreational Shooting Protection Act''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF DEFINITION.

Section 3(2)(B) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (15
U.S.C. 2602(2)(B)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(B) Such term does not include--'' and
inserting the following:
``(B) Exclusions.--The term `chemical substance' does not
include--'';
(2) in clauses (i) through (iv), by striking the commas at
the end of the clauses and inserting semicolons;
(3) by striking clause (v) and inserting the following:
``(v)(I) any article the sale of which is subject to, or
eligible to be subject to, the tax imposed by section 4181 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and any separate component
of such an article (including shells, cartridges, and
ammunition); or
``(II) any substance that is manufactured, processed, or
distributed in commerce for use in any article or separate
component described in subclause (I) (as determined without
regard to any exemption from the tax imposed by section 4181
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 under section 4182,
section 4221, or any other provision of that Code);'';
(4) in clause (vi), by striking the period at the end and
inserting ``; or'';
(5) by inserting after clause (vi) the following:
``(vii)(I) any article the sale of which is subject to, or
eligible to be subject to, the tax imposed by section 4161 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, and any separate component
of such an article; or
``(II) any substance that is manufactured, processed, or
distributed in commerce for use in any article or separate
component described in subclause (I).''; and
(6) in the matter following clause (vii) (as added by
paragraph (5)), by striking ``The term `food' as used in
clause (vi) of this subparagraph includes'' and inserting the
following:

[[Page S7624]]

``(C) Related definition.--For purposes of clause (vi) of
subparagraph (B), the term `food' includes''.

Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, today I am proud to introduce the Healthy
Media for Youth Act. The purpose of this bill is to promote positive
media depictions of girls and women among our nation's youth.
The majority of 8- to 18-year-olds spend about 10 hours a day
watching television, on the computer, or playing video games.
Unfortunately, the images they see often reinforce gender stereotypes,
emphasize unrealistic body images, or show women in passive roles.
Positive and realistic female body images remain a problem. A recent
survey by Girl Scouts of the USA's Research Institute found that 89
percent of girls feel the fashion industry places a lot of pressure on
teenage girls to be thin. Even among girls as young as grades 3 through
5, fifty-four percent worry about their appearance, and 37 percent of
these young girls worry specifically about their weight.
Women are often portrayed in passive or stereotypical roles, rather
than in positions of power. Violence against women continues to be
prevalent throughout media. The Parents Television Council reports that
between 2004 and 2009, violence against women and teenage girls
increased on television programming at a rate of 120 percent, compared
with the 2 percent increase of overall violence in television content.
In 2007, the American Psychological Association, APA, conducted a
report on the Sexualization of Girls and found that three of the most
common mental health problems among girls--eating disorders, depression
or depressed mood, and low self-esteem--are linked to the sexualization
of girls and women in media. Boys are also negatively affected by the
portrayal of girls because it sets up unrealistic expectations, which
may impair future relationships between girls and boys.
The bill I'm introducing today starts to tackle this problem by
promoting positive media messages about girls and women among our
nation's youth.
Specifically, this bill would direct the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, HHS, to award grants to nonprofit organizations to
promote positive media depictions of girls and women among youth, and
to empower girls and boys by developing self-esteem and leadership
skills.
The bill also directs the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
CDC, in coordination with the National Institute of Child Health and
Human Development to review, synthesize, and research the role and
impact of depictions of girls and women in the media on the
psychological, sexual, physical, and interpersonal development of
youth.
Finally, this bill requires the Federal Communications Commission,
FCC, to convene a National Task Force on Girls and Women in the Media
in order to develop voluntary steps and goals for promoting healthy and
positive depictions of girls and women in the media for the benefit of
all youth.
We must reverse this trend for this generation of youth and for
future generations.
______

By Mr. CARPER (for himself, Mr. Warner, Mr. Akaka, Ms. Collins,
Mr. Voinovich, and Mr. Lieberman):
S. 3853. A bill to modernize and refine the requirements of the
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, to require quarterly
performance reviews of Federal policy and management priorities, to
establish Chief Operating Officers, Performance Improvement Officers,
and the Performance Improvement Council, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, today, as Chairman of the Subcommittee on
Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services,
and International Security, I offer a piece of legislation, along with
my distinguished colleagues Senators Warner, Akaka, Lieberman, Collins
and Voinovich, that I believe will lead us on a path to a more
effective and efficient federal government.
It has been more than 17 years since Congress passed the Government
Performance and Results Act, GPRA, to help us better manage our finite
resources and improve the effectiveness and delivery of Federal
programs. Since that time, agencies across the federal government have
developed and implemented strategic plans and have routinely generated
a tremendous amount of performance data. The question is--have Federal
agencies actually used their performance data to get better results?
Producing information does not by itself improve performance and
experts from both sides of the aisle agree that the solutions developed
in 1993 have not worked. The American people deserve--and our fiscal
challenges demand--better results.
The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 which I offer today aims to assist
and motivate--Federal agencies to put away the stacks of reports that
no one reads and actually start to think how we can improve the
effectiveness, efficiency and transparency of our Government.
This legislation represents the many lessons learned over the past 17
years and brings a high level, government wide focus to making our
government work better for the American people. It builds off the
important strides President Obama's administration has made in this
area and pushes Federal agencies even further to not only make goals,
but to make individuals responsible for meeting them.
While the strength of our democracy rests on the ability of our
government to deliver its promises to the people, we in Congress have a
responsibility to be judicious stewards of the resources taxpayers
invest in America, and ensure those resources are managed honestly,
transparently and effectively. The GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 also
calls on the federal government to identify where we are not performing
well so we can make better decisions about where we should and should
not be putting our scarce resources.
Today we face unparalleled challenges both here and abroad, and these
require a knowledgeable and nimble federal government that can respond
effectively. With concerns growing over the mounting federal deficit
and national debt, the American people deserve to know that every
dollar they send to Washington is being used to its utmost potential.
Performance information is an invaluable tool that can ensure just
that. If used effectively, it can identify problems, find solutions,
and develop approaches that improve outcomes and produce results.
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. 3853

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``GPRA
Modernization Act of 2010''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act
is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Strategic planning amendments.
Sec. 3. Performance planning amendments.
Sec. 4. Performance reporting amendments.
Sec. 5. Federal Government and agency priority goals.
Sec. 6. Quarterly priority progress reviews and use of performance
information.
Sec. 7. Transparency of Federal Government programs, priority goals,
and results.
Sec. 8. Agency Chief Operating Officers.
Sec. 9. Agency Performance Improvement Officers and the Performance
Improvement Council.
Sec. 10. Format of performance plans and reports.
Sec. 11. Reducing duplicative and outdated agency reporting.
Sec. 12. Performance management skills and competencies.
Sec. 13. Technical and conforming amendments.
Sec. 14. Implementation of this Act.
Sec. 15. Congressional oversight and legislation.

SEC. 2. STRATEGIC PLANNING AMENDMENTS.

Chapter 3 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by
striking section 306 and inserting the following:

``Sec. 306. Agency strategic plans

``(a) Not later than the first Monday in February of any
year following the year in which the term of the President
commences under section 101 of title 3, the head of each
agency shall make available on the public website of the
agency a strategic plan and notify the President and Congress
of its availability. Such plan shall contain--
``(1) a comprehensive mission statement covering the major
functions and operations of the agency;

[[Page S7625]]

``(2) general goals and objectives, including outcome-
oriented goals, for the major functions and operations of the
agency;
``(3) a description of how any goals and objectives
contribute to the Federal Government priority goals required
by section 1120(a) of title 31;
``(4) a description of how the goals and objectives are to
be achieved, including--
``(A) a description of the operational processes, skills
and technology, and the human, capital, information, and
other resources required to achieve those goals and
objectives; and
``(B) a description of how the agency is working with other
agencies to achieve its goals and objectives as well as
relevant Federal Government priority goals;
``(5) a description of how the goals and objectives
incorporate views and suggestions obtained through
congressional consultations required under subsection (d);
``(6) a description of how the performance goals provided
in the plan required by section 1115(a) of title 31,
including the agency priority goals required by section
1120(b) of title 31, if applicable, contribute to the general
goals and objectives in the strategic plan;
``(7) an identification of those key factors external to
the agency and beyond its control that could significantly
affect the achievement of the general goals and objectives;
and
``(8) a description of the program evaluations used in
establishing or revising general goals and objectives, with a
schedule for future program evaluations to be conducted.
``(b) The strategic plan shall cover a period of not less
than 4 years following the fiscal year in which the plan is
submitted. As needed, the head of the agency may make
adjustments to the strategic plan to reflect significant
changes in the environment in which the agency is operating,
with appropriate notification of Congress.
``(c) The performance plan required by section 1115(b) of
title 31 shall be consistent with the agency's strategic
plan. A performance plan may not be submitted for a fiscal
year not covered by a current strategic plan under this
section.
``(d) When developing or making adjustments to a strategic
plan, the agency shall consult periodically with the
Congress, including majority and minority views from the
appropriate authorizing, appropriations, and oversight
committees, and shall solicit and consider the views and
suggestions of those entities potentially affected by or
interested in such a plan. The agency shall consult with the
appropriate committees of Congress at least once every 2
years.
``(e) The functions and activities of this section shall be
considered to be inherently governmental functions. The
drafting of strategic plans under this section shall be
performed only by Federal employees.
``(f) For purposes of this section the term `agency' means
an Executive agency defined under section 105, but does not
include the Central Intelligence Agency, the Government
Accountability Office, the United States Postal Service, and
the Postal Regulatory Commission.''.

SEC. 3. PERFORMANCE PLANNING AMENDMENTS.

Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
striking section 1115 and inserting the following:

``Sec. 1115. Federal Government and agency performance plans

``(a) Federal Government Performance Plans.--In carrying
out the provisions of section 1105(a)(28), the Director of
the Office of Management and Budget shall coordinate with
agencies to develop the Federal Government performance plan.
In addition to the submission of such plan with each budget
of the United States Government, the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget shall ensure that all information
required by this subsection is concurrently made available on
the website provided under section 1122 and updated
periodically, but no less than annually. The Federal
Government performance plan shall--
``(1) establish Federal Government performance goals to
define the level of performance to be achieved during the
year in which the plan is submitted and the next fiscal year
for each of the Federal Government priority goals required
under section 1120(a) of this title;
``(2) identify the agencies, organizations, program
activities, regulations, tax expenditures, policies, and
other activities contributing to each Federal Government
performance goal during the current fiscal year;
``(3) for each Federal Government performance goal,
identify a lead Government official who shall be responsible
for coordinating the efforts to achieve the goal;
``(4) establish common Federal Government performance
indicators with quarterly targets to be used in measuring or
assessing--
``(A) overall progress toward each Federal Government
performance goal; and
``(B) the individual contribution of each agency,
organization, program activity, regulation, tax expenditure,
policy, and other activity identified under paragraph (2);
``(5) establish clearly defined quarterly milestones; and
``(6) identify major management challenges that are
Governmentwide or crosscutting in nature and describe plans
to address such challenges, including relevant performance
goals, performance indicators, and milestones.
``(b) Agency Performance Plans.--Not later than the first
Monday in February of each year, the head of each agency
shall make available on a public website of the agency, and
notify the President and the Congress of its availability, a
performance plan covering each program activity set forth in
the budget of such agency. Such plan shall--
``(1) establish performance goals to define the level of
performance to be achieved during the year in which the plan
is submitted and the next fiscal year;
``(2) express such goals in an objective, quantifiable, and
measurable form unless authorized to be in an alternative
form under subsection (c);
``(3) describe how the performance goals contribute to--
``(A) the general goals and objectives established in the
agency's strategic plan required by section 306(a)(2) of
title 5; and
``(B) any of the Federal Government performance goals
established in the Federal Government performance plan
required by subsection (a)(1);
``(4) identify among the performance goals those which are
designated as agency priority goals as required by section
1120(b) of this title, if applicable;
``(5) provide a description of how the performance goals
are to be achieved, including--
``(A) the operation processes, training, skills and
technology, and the human, capital, information, and other
resources and strategies required to meet those performance
goals;
``(B) clearly defined milestones;
``(C) an identification of the organizations, program
activities, regulations, policies, and other activities that
contribute to each performance goal, both within and external
to the agency;
``(D) a description of how the agency is working with other
agencies to achieve its performance goals as well as relevant
Federal Government performance goals; and
``(E) an identification of the agency officials responsible
for the achievement of each performance goal, who shall be
known as goal leaders;
``(6) establish a balanced set of performance indicators to
be used in measuring or assessing progress toward each
performance goal, including, as appropriate, customer
service, efficiency, output, and outcome indicators;
``(7) provide a basis for comparing actual program results
with the established performance goals;
``(8) a description of how the agency will ensure the
accuracy and reliability of the data used to measure progress
towards its performance goals, including an identification
of--
``(A) the means to be used to verify and validate measured
values;
``(B) the sources for the data;
``(C) the level of accuracy required for the intended use
of the data;
``(D) any limitations to the data at the required level of
accuracy; and
``(E) how the agency will compensate for such limitations
if needed to reach the required level of accuracy;
``(9) describe major management challenges the agency faces
and identify--
``(A) planned actions to address such challenges;
``(B) performance goals, performance indicators, and
milestones to measure progress toward resolving such
challenges; and
``(C) the agency official responsible for resolving such
challenges; and
``(10) identify low-priority program activities based on an
analysis of their contribution to the mission and goals of
the agency and include an evidence-based justification for
designating a program activity as low priority.
``(c) Alternative Form.--If an agency, in consultation with
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget,
determines that it is not feasible to express the performance
goals for a particular program activity in an objective,
quantifiable, and measurable form, the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget may authorize an alternative form.
Such alternative form shall--
``(1) include separate descriptive statements of--
``(A)(i) a minimally effective program; and
``(ii) a successful program; or
``(B) such alternative as authorized by the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget, with sufficient precision
and in such terms that would allow for an accurate,
independent determination of whether the program activity's
performance meets the criteria of the description; or
``(2) state why it is infeasible or impractical to express
a performance goal in any form for the program activity.
``(d) Treatment of Program Activities.--For the purpose of
complying with this section, an agency may aggregate,
disaggregate, or consolidate program activities, except that
any aggregation or consolidation may not omit or minimize the
significance of any program activity constituting a major
function or operation for the agency.
``(e) Appendix.--An agency may submit with an annual
performance plan an appendix covering any portion of the plan
that--
``(1) is specifically authorized under criteria established
by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of
national defense or foreign policy; and
``(2) is properly classified pursuant to such Executive
order.

[[Page S7626]]

``(f) Inherently Governmental Functions.--The functions and
activities of this section shall be considered to be
inherently governmental functions. The drafting of
performance plans under this section shall be performed only
by Federal employees.
``(g) Chief Human Capital Officers.--With respect to each
agency with a Chief Human Capital Officer, the Chief Human
Capital Officer shall prepare that portion of the annual
performance plan described under subsection (b)(5)(A).
``(h) Definitions.--For purposes of this section and
sections 1116 through 1125, and sections 9703 and 9704, the
term--
``(1) `agency' has the same meaning as such term is defined
under section 306(f) of title 5;
``(2) `crosscutting' means across organizational (such as
agency) boundaries;
``(3) `customer service measure' means an assessment of
service delivery to a customer, client, citizen, or other
recipient, which can include an assessment of quality,
timeliness, and satisfaction among other factors;
``(4) `efficiency measure' means a ratio of a program
activity's inputs (such as costs or hours worked by
employees) to its outputs (amount of products or services
delivered) or outcomes (the desired results of a program);
``(5) `major management challenge' means programs or
management functions, within or across agencies, that have
greater vulnerability to waste, fraud, abuse, and
mismanagement (such as issues identified by the Government
Accountability Office as high risk or issues identified by an
Inspector General) where a failure to perform well could
seriously affect the ability of an agency or the Government
to achieve its mission or goals;
``(6) `milestone' means a scheduled event signifying the
completion of a major deliverable or a set of related
deliverables or a phase of work;
``(7) `outcome measure' means an assessment of the results
of a program activity compared to its intended purpose;
``(8) `output measure' means the tabulation, calculation,
or recording of activity or effort that can be expressed in a
quantitative or qualitative manner;
``(9) `performance goal' means a target level of
performance expressed as a tangible, measurable objective,
against which actual achievement can be compared, including a
goal expressed as a quantitative standard, value, or rate;
``(10) `performance indicator' means a particular value or
characteristic used to measure output or outcome;
``(11) `program activity' means a specific activity or
project as listed in the program and financing schedules of
the annual budget of the United States Government; and
``(12) `program evaluation' means an assessment, through
objective measurement and systematic analysis, of the manner
and extent to which Federal programs achieve intended
objectives.''.

SEC. 4. PERFORMANCE REPORTING AMENDMENTS.

Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
striking section 1116 and inserting the following:

``Sec. 1116. Agency performance reporting

``(a) The head of each agency shall make available on a
public website of the agency an update on agency performance.
``(b)(1) Each update shall compare actual performance
achieved with the performance goals established in the agency
performance plan under section 1115(b) and shall occur no
less than 150 days after the end of each fiscal year, with
more frequent updates of actual performance on indicators
that provide data of significant value to the Government,
Congress, or program partners at a reasonable level of
administrative burden.
``(2) If performance goals are specified in an alternative
form under section 1115(c), the results shall be described in
relation to such specifications, including whether the
performance failed to meet the criteria of a minimally
effective or successful program.
``(c) Each update shall--
``(1) review the success of achieving the performance goals
and include actual results for the 5 preceding fiscal years;
``(2) evaluate the performance plan for the current fiscal
year relative to the performance achieved toward the
performance goals during the period covered by the update;
``(3) explain and describe where a performance goal has not
been met (including when a program activity's performance is
determined not to have met the criteria of a successful
program activity under section 1115(c)(1)(A)(ii) or a
corresponding level of achievement if another alternative
form is used)--
``(A) why the goal was not met;
``(B) those plans and schedules for achieving the
established performance goal; and
``(C) if the performance goal is impractical or infeasible,
why that is the case and what action is recommended;
``(4) describe the use and assess the effectiveness in
achieving performance goals of any waiver under section 9703
of this title;
``(5) include a review of the performance goals and
evaluation of the performance plan relative to the agency's
strategic human capital management;
``(6) describe how the agency ensures the accuracy and
reliability of the data used to measure progress towards its
performance goals, including an identification of--
``(A) the means used to verify and validate measured
values;
``(B) the sources for the data;
``(C) the level of accuracy required for the intended use
of the data;
``(D) any limitations to the data at the required level of
accuracy; and
``(E) how the agency has compensated for such limitations
if needed to reach the required level of accuracy; and
``(7) include the summary findings of those program
evaluations completed during the period covered by the
update.
``(d) If an agency performance update includes any program
activity or information that is specifically authorized under
criteria established by an Executive Order to be kept secret
in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and is
properly classified pursuant to such Executive Order, the
head of the agency shall make such information available in
the classified appendix provided under section 1115(e).
``(e) The functions and activities of this section shall be
considered to be inherently governmental functions. The
drafting of agency performance updates under this section
shall be performed only by Federal employees.''.

SEC. 5. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND AGENCY PRIORITY GOALS.

Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
adding after section 1119 the following:

``Sec. 1120. Federal Government and agency priority goals

``(a) Federal Government Priority Goals.--
``(1) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget
shall coordinate with agencies to develop priority goals to
improve the performance and management of the Federal
Government. Such Federal Government priority goals shall
include--
``(A) outcome-oriented goals covering a limited number of
crosscutting policy areas; and
``(B) goals for management improvements needed across the
Federal Government, including--
``(i) financial management;
``(ii) human capital management;
``(iii) information technology management;
``(iv) procurement and acquisition management; and
``(v) real property management;
``(2) The Federal Government priority goals shall be long-
term in nature. At a minimum, the Federal Government priority
goals shall be updated or revised every 4 years and made
publicly available concurrently with the submission of the
budget of the United States Government made in the first full
fiscal year following any year in which the term of the
President commences under section 101 of title 3. As needed,
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget may make
adjustments to the Federal Government priority goals to
reflect significant changes in the environment in which the
Federal Government is operating, with appropriate
notification of Congress.
``(3) When developing or making adjustments to Federal
Government priority goals, the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget shall consult periodically with the
Congress, including obtaining majority and minority views
from--
``(A) the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and
the House of Representatives;
``(B) the Committees on the Budget of the Senate and the
House of Representatives;
``(C) the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs of the Senate;
``(D) the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of
the House of Representatives;
``(E) the Committee on Finance of the Senate;
``(F) the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of
Representatives; and
``(G) any other committees as determined appropriate;
``(4) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget
shall consult with the appropriate committees of Congress at
least once every 2 years.
``(5) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget
shall make information about the Federal Government priority
goals available on the website described under section 1122
of this title.
``(6) The Federal Government performance plan required
under section 1115(a) of this title shall be consistent with
the Federal Government priority goals.
``(b) Agency Priority Goals.--
``(1) Every 2 years, the head of each agency listed in
section 901(b) of this title, or as otherwise determined by
the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, shall
identify agency priority goals from among the performance
goals of the agency. The Director of the Office of Management
and Budget shall determine the total number of agency
priority goals across the Government, and the number to be
developed by each agency. The agency priority goals shall--
``(A) reflect the highest priorities of the agency, as
determined by the head of the agency and informed by the
Federal Government priority goals provided under subsection
(a) and the consultations with Congress and other interested
parties required by section 306(d) of title 5;
``(B) have ambitious targets that can be achieved within a
2-year period;
``(C) have a clearly identified agency official, known as a
goal leader, who is responsible for the achievement of each
agency priority goal;
``(D) have interim quarterly targets for performance
indicators if more frequent updates of actual performance
provides data of

[[Page S7627]]

significant value to the Government, Congress, or program
partners at a reasonable level of administrative burden; and
``(E) have clearly defined quarterly milestones.
``(2) If an agency priority goal includes any program
activity or information that is specifically authorized under
criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret
in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and is
properly classified pursuant to such Executive order, the
head of the agency shall make such information available in
the classified appendix provided under section 1115(e).
``(c) The functions and activities of this section shall be
considered to be inherently governmental functions. The
development of Federal Government and agency priority goals
shall be performed only by Federal employees.''.

SEC. 6. QUARTERLY PRIORITY PROGRESS REVIEWS AND USE OF
PERFORMANCE INFORMATION.

Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
adding after section 1120 (as added by section 5 of this Act)
the following:

``Sec. 1121. Quarterly priority progress reviews and use of
performance information

``(a) Use of Performance Information To Achieve Federal
Government Priority Goals.--Not less than quarterly, the
Director of the Office of Management and Budget, with the
support of the Performance Improvement Council, shall--
``(1) for each Federal Government priority goal required by
section 1120(a) of this title, review with the appropriate
lead Government official the progress achieved during the
most recent quarter, overall trend data, and the likelihood
of meeting the planned level of performance;
``(2) include in such reviews officials from the agencies,
organizations, and program activities that contribute to the
accomplishment of each Federal Government priority goal;
``(3) assess whether agencies, organizations, program
activities, regulations, tax expenditures, policies, and
other activities are contributing as planned to each Federal
Government priority goal;
``(4) categorize the Federal Government priority goals by
risk of not achieving the planned level of performance; and
``(5) for the Federal Government priority goals at greatest
risk of not meeting the planned level of performance,
identify prospects and strategies for performance
improvement, including any needed changes to agencies,
organizations, program activities, regulations, tax
expenditures, policies or other activities.
``(b) Agency Use of Performance Information To Achieve
Agency Priority Goals.--Not less than quarterly, at each
agency required to develop agency priority goals required by
section 1120(b) of this title, the head of the agency and
Chief Operating Officer, with the support of the agency
Performance Improvement Officer, shall--
``(1) for each agency priority goal, review with the
appropriate goal leader the progress achieved during the most
recent quarter, overall trend data, and the likelihood of
meeting the planned level of performance;
``(2) coordinate with relevant personnel within and outside
the agency who contribute to the accomplishment of each
agency priority goal;
``(3) assess whether relevant organizations, program
activities, regulations, policies, and other activities are
contributing as planned to the agency priority goals;
``(4) categorize agency priority goals by risk of not
achieving the planned level of performance; and
``(5) for agency priority goals at greatest risk of not
meeting the planned level of performance, identify prospects
and strategies for performance improvement, including any
needed changes to agency program activities, regulations,
policies, or other activities.''.

SEC. 7. TRANSPARENCY OF FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS, PRIORITY
GOALS, AND RESULTS.

Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
adding after section 1121 (as added by section 6 of this Act)
the following:

``Sec. 1122. Transparency of programs, priority goals, and
results

``(a) Transparency of Agency Programs.--
``(1) In general.--Not later than October 1, 2012, the
Office of Management and Budget shall--
``(A) ensure the effective operation of a single website;
``(B) at a minimum, update the website on a quarterly
basis; and
``(C) include on the website information about each program
identified by the agencies.
``(2) Information.--Information for each program described
under paragraph (1) shall include--
``(A) an identification of how the agency defines the term
`program', consistent with guidance provided by the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget, including the program
activities that are aggregated, disaggregated, or
consolidated to be considered a program by the agency;
``(B) a description of the purposes of the program and the
contribution of the program to the mission and goals of the
agency; and
``(C) an identification of funding for the current fiscal
year and previous 2 fiscal years.
``(b) Transparency of Agency Priority Goals and Results.--
The head of each agency required to develop agency priority
goals shall make information about each agency priority goal
available to the Office of Management and Budget for
publication on the website, with the exception of any
information covered by section 1120(b)(2) of this title. In
addition to an identification of each agency priority goal,
the website shall also consolidate information about each
agency priority goal, including--
``(1) a description of how the agency incorporated any
views and suggestions obtained through congressional
consultations about the agency priority goal;
``(2) an identification of key factors external to the
agency and beyond its control that could significantly affect
the achievement of the agency priority goal;
``(3) a description of how each agency priority goal will
be achieved, including--
``(A) the strategies and resources required to meet the
priority goal;
``(B) clearly defined milestones;
``(C) the organizations, program activities, regulations,
policies, and other activities that contribute to each goal,
both within and external to the agency;
``(D) how the agency is working with other agencies to
achieve the goal; and
``(E) an identification of the agency official responsible
for achieving the priority goal;
``(4) the performance indicators to be used in measuring or
assessing progress;
``(5) a description of how the agency ensures the accuracy
and reliability of the data used to measure progress towards
the priority goal, including an identification of--
``(A) the means used to verify and validate measured
values;
``(B) the sources for the data;
``(C) the level of accuracy required for the intended use
of the data;
``(D) any limitations to the data at the required level of
accuracy; and
``(E) how the agency has compensated for such limitations
if needed to reach the required level of accuracy;
``(6) the results achieved during the most recent quarter
and overall trend data compared to the planned level of
performance;
``(7) an assessment of whether relevant organizations,
program activities, regulations, policies, and other
activities are contributing as planned;
``(8) an identification of the agency priority goals at
risk of not achieving the planned level of performance; and
``(9) any prospects or strategies for performance
improvement.
``(c) Transparency of Federal Government Priority Goals and
Results.--The Director of the Office of Management and Budget
shall also make available on the website--
``(1) a brief description of each of the Federal Government
priority goals required by section 1120(a) of this title;
``(2) a description of how the Federal Government priority
goals incorporate views and suggestions obtained through
congressional consultations;
``(3) the Federal Government performance goals and
performance indicators associated with each Federal
Government priority goal as required by section 1115(a) of
this title;
``(4) an identification of the lead Government official for
each Federal Government performance goal;
``(5) the results achieved during the most recent quarter
and overall trend data compared to the planned level of
performance;
``(6) an identification of the agencies, organizations,
program activities, regulations, tax expenditures, policies,
and other activities that contribute to each Federal
Government priority goal;
``(7) an assessment of whether relevant agencies,
organizations, program activities, regulations, tax
expenditures, policies, and other activities are contributing
as planned;
``(8) an identification of the Federal Government priority
goals at risk of not achieving the planned level of
performance; and
``(9) any prospects or strategies for performance
improvement.
``(d) Information on Website.--The information made
available on the website under this section shall be readily
accessible and easily found on the Internet by the public and
members and committees of Congress. Such information shall
also be presented in a searchable, machine-readable format.
The Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall
issue guidance to ensure that such information is provided in
a way that presents a coherent picture of all Federal
programs, and the performance of the Federal Government as
well as individual agencies.''.

SEC. 8. AGENCY CHIEF OPERATING OFFICERS.

Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
adding after section 1122 (as added by section 7 of this Act)
the following:

``Sec. 1123. Chief Operating Officers

``(a) Establishment.--At each agency, the deputy head of
agency, or equivalent, shall be the Chief Operating Officer
of the agency.
``(b) Function.--Each Chief Operating Officer shall be
responsible for improving the management and performance of
the agency, and shall--
``(1) provide overall organization management to improve
agency performance and achieve the mission and goals of the
agency through the use of strategic and performance planning,
measurement, analysis, regular assessment of progress, and
use of performance information to improve the results
achieved;
``(2) advise and assist the head of agency in carrying out
the requirements of sections

[[Page S7628]]

1115 through 1122 of this title and section 306 of title 5;
``(3) oversee agency-specific efforts to improve management
functions within the agency and across Government; and
``(4) coordinate and collaborate with relevant personnel
within and external to the agency who have a significant role
in contributing to and achieving the mission and goals of the
agency, such as the Chief Financial Officer, Chief Human
Capital Officer, Chief Acquisition Officer/Senior Procurement
Executive, Chief Information Officer, and other line of
business chiefs at the agency.''.

SEC. 9. AGENCY PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT OFFICERS AND THE
PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT COUNCIL.

Chapter 11 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by
adding after section 1123 (as added by section 8 of this Act)
the following:

``Sec. 1124. Performance Improvement Officers and the
Performance Improvement Council

``(a) Performance Improvement Officers.--
``(1) Establishment.--At each agency, the head of the
agency, in consultation with the agency Chief Operating
Officer, shall designate a senior executive of the agency as
the agency Performance Improvement Officer.
``(2) Function.--Each Performance Improvement Officer shall
report directly to the Chief Operating Officer. Subject to
the direction of the Chief Operating Officer, each
Performance Improvement Officer shall--
``(A) advise and assist the head of the agency and the
Chief Operating Officer to ensure that the mission and goals
of the agency are achieved through strategic and performance
planning, measurement, analysis, regular assessment of
progress, and use of performance information to improve the
results achieved;
``(B) advise the head of the agency and the Chief Operating
Officer on the selection of agency goals, including
opportunities to collaborate with other agencies on common
goals;
``(C) assist the head of the agency and the Chief Operating
Officer in overseeing the implementation of the agency
strategic planning, performance planning, and reporting
requirements provided under sections 1115 through 1122 of
this title and sections 306 of title 5, including the
contributions of the agency to the Federal Government
priority goals;
``(D) support the head of agency and the Chief Operating
Officer in the conduct of regular reviews of agency
performance, including at least quarterly reviews of progress
achieved toward agency priority goals, if applicable;
``(E) assist the head of the agency and the Chief Operating
Officer in the development and use within the agency of
performance measures in personnel performance appraisals,
and, as appropriate, other agency personnel and planning
processes and assessments; and
``(F) ensure that agency progress toward the achievement of
all goals is communicated to leaders, managers, and employees
in the agency and Congress, and made available on a public
website of the agency.
``(b) Performance Improvement Council.--
``(1) Establishment.--There is established a Performance
Improvement Council, consisting of--
``(A) the Deputy Director for Management of the Office of
Management and Budget, who shall act as chairperson of the
Council;
``(B) the Performance Improvement Officer from each agency
defined in section 901(b) of this title;
``(C) other Performance Improvement Officers as determined
appropriate by the chairperson; and
``(D) other individuals as determined appropriate by the
chairperson.
``(2) Function.--The Performance Improvement Council
shall--
``(A) be convened by the chairperson or the designee of the
chairperson, who shall preside at the meetings of the
Performance Improvement Council, determine its agenda, direct
its work, and establish and direct subgroups of the
Performance Improvement Council, as appropriate, to deal with
particular subject matters;
``(B) assist the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget to improve the performance of the Federal Government
and achieve the Federal Government priority goals;
``(C) assist the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget in implementing the planning, reporting, and use of
performance information requirements related to the Federal
Government priority goals provided under sections 1115, 1120,
1121, and 1122 of this title;
``(D) work to resolve specific Governmentwide or
crosscutting performance issues, as necessary;
``(E) facilitate the exchange among agencies of practices
that have led to performance improvements within specific
programs, agencies, or across agencies;
``(F) coordinate with other interagency management
councils;
``(G) seek advice and information as appropriate from
nonmember agencies, particularly smaller agencies;
``(H) consider the performance improvement experiences of
corporations, nonprofit organizations, foreign, State, and
local governments, Government employees, public sector
unions, and customers of Government services;
``(I) receive such assistance, information and advice from
agencies as the Council may request, which agencies shall
provide to the extent permitted by law; and
``(J) develop and submit to the Director of the Office of
Management and Budget, or when appropriate to the President
through the Director of the Office of Management and Budget,
at times and in such formats as the chairperson may specify,
recommendations to streamline and improve performance
management policies and requirements.
``(3) Support.--
``(A) In general.--The Administrator of General Services
shall provide administrative and other support for the
Council to implement this section.
``(B) Personnel.--The heads of agencies with Performance
Improvement Officers serving on the Council shall, as
appropriate and to the extent permitted by law, provide at
the request of the chairperson of the Performance Improvement
Council up to 2 personnel authorizations to serve at the
direction of the chairperson.''.

SEC. 10. FORMAT OF PERFORMANCE PLANS AND REPORTS.

(a) Searchable, Machine-readable Plans and Reports.--For
fiscal year 2012 and each fiscal year thereafter, each agency
required to produce strategic plans, performance plans, and
performance updates in accordance with the amendments made by
this Act shall--
(1) not incur expenses for the printing of strategic plans,
performance plans, and performance reports for release
external to the agency, except when providing such documents
to the Congress;
(2) produce such plans and reports in searchable, machine-
readable formats; and
(3) make such plans and reports available on the website
described under section 1122 of title 31, United States Code.
(b) Web-based Performance Planning and Reporting.--
(1) In general.--Not later than June 1, 2012, the Director
of the Office of Management and Budget shall issue guidance
to agencies to provide concise and timely performance
information for publication on the website described under
section 1122 of title 31, United States Code, including, at a
minimum, all requirements of sections 1115 and 1116 of title
31, United States Code, except for section 1115(e).
(2) High-priority goals.--For agencies required to develop
agency priority goals under section 1120(b) of title 31,
United States Code, the performance information required
under this section shall be merged with the existing
information required under section 1122 of title 31, United
States Code.
(3) Considerations.--In developing guidance under this
subsection, the Director of the Office of Management and
Budget shall take into consideration the experiences of
agencies in making consolidated performance planning and
reporting information available on the website as required
under section 1122 of title 31, United States Code.

SEC. 11. REDUCING DUPLICATIVE AND OUTDATED AGENCY REPORTING.

(a) Budget Contents.--Section 1105(a) of title 31, United
States Code, is amended--
(1) by redesignating second paragraph (33) as paragraph
(35); and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(37) the list of plans and reports, as provided for under
section 1125, that agencies identified for elimination or
consolidation because the plans and reports are determined
outdated or duplicative of other required plans and
reports.''.
(b) Elimination of Unnecessary Agency Reporting.--Chapter
11 of title 31, United States Code, is further amended by
adding after section 1124 (as added by section 9 of this Act)
the following:

``Sec. 1125. Elimination of unnecessary agency reporting

``(a) Agency Identification of Unnecessary Reports.--
Annually, based on guidance provided by the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget, the Chief Operating Officer
at each agency shall--
``(1) compile a list that identifies all plans and reports
the agency produces for Congress, in accordance with
statutory requirements or as directed in congressional
reports;
``(2) analyze the list compiled under paragraph (1),
identify which plans and reports are outdated or duplicative
of other required plans and reports, and refine the list to
include only the plans and reports identified to be outdated
or duplicative;
``(3) consult with the congressional committees that
receive the plans and reports identified under paragraph (2)
to determine whether those plans and reports are no longer
useful to the committees and could be eliminated or
consolidated with other plans and reports; and
``(4) provide a total count of plans and reports compiled
under paragraph (1) and the list of outdated and duplicative
reports identified under paragraph (2) to the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget.
``(b) Plans and Reports.--
``(1) First year.--During the first year of implementation
of this section, the list of plans and reports identified by
each agency as outdated or duplicative shall be not less than
10 percent of all plans and reports identified under
subsection (a)(1).

[[Page S7629]]

``(2) Subsequent years.--In each year following the first
year described under paragraph (1), the Director of the
Office of Management and Budget shall determine the minimum
percent of plans and reports to be identified as outdated or
duplicative on each list of plans and reports.
``(c) Request for Elimination of Unnecessary Reports.--In
addition to including the list of plans and reports
determined to be outdated or duplicative by each agency in
the budget of the United States Government, as provided by
section 1105(a)(37), the Director of the Office of Management
and Budget may concurrently submit to Congress legislation to
eliminate or consolidate such plans and reports.''.

SEC. 12. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT SKILLS AND COMPETENCIES.

(a) Performance Management Skills and Competencies.--Not
later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act,
the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in
consultation with the Performance Improvement Council, shall
identify the key skills and competencies needed by Federal
Government personnel for developing goals, evaluating
programs, and analyzing and using performance information for
the purpose of improving Government efficiency and
effectiveness.
(b) Position Classifications.--Not later than 2 years after
the date of enactment of this Act, based on the
identifications under subsection (a), the Director of the
Office of Personnel Management shall incorporate, as
appropriate, such key skills and competencies into relevant
position classifications.
(c) Incorporation Into Existing Agency Training.--Not later
than 2 years after the enactment of this Act, the Director of
the Office of Personnel Management shall work with each
agency, as defined under section 306(f) of title 5, United
States Code, to incorporate the key skills identified under
subsection (a) into training for relevant employees at each
agency.

SEC. 13. TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

(a) The table of contents for chapter 3 of title 5, United
States Code, is amended by striking the item relating to
section 306 and inserting the following:

``306. Agency strategic plans.''.

(b) The table of contents for chapter 11 of title 31,
United States Code, is amended by striking the items relating
to section 1115 and 1116 and inserting the following:

``1115. Federal Government and agency performance plans.
``1116. Agency performance reporting.''.

``1120. Federal Government and agency priority goals.
``1121. Quarterly priority progress reviews and use of performance
information.
``1122. Transparency of programs, priority goals, and results.
``1123. Chief Operating Officers.
``1124. Performance Improvement Officers and the Performance
Improvement Council.
``1125. Elimination of unnecessary agency reporting.''.

SEC. 14. IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS ACT.

(a) Interim Planning and Reporting.--
(1) In general.--The Director of the Office of Management
and Budget shall coordinate with agencies to develop interim
Federal Government priority goals and submit interim Federal
Government performance plans consistent with the requirements
of this Act beginning with the submission of the fiscal year
2013 Budget of the United States Government.
(2) Requirements.--Each agency shall--
(A) not later than February 6, 2012, make adjustments to
its strategic plan to make the plan consistent with the
requirements of this Act;
(B) prepare and submit performance plans consistent with
the requirements of this Act, including the identification of
agency priority goals, beginning with the performance plan
for fiscal year 2013; and
(C) make performance reporting updates consistent with the
requirements of this Act beginning in fiscal year 2012.
(3) Quarterly reviews.--The quarterly priority progress
reviews required under this Act shall begin--
(A) with the first full quarter beginning on or after the
date of enactment of this Act for agencies based on the
agency priority goals contained in the Analytical
Perspectives volume of the Fiscal Year 2011 Budget of the
United States Government; and
(B) with the quarter ending June 30, 2012 for the interim
Federal Government priority goals.
(b) Guidance.--The Director of the Office of Management and
Budget shall prepare guidance for agencies in carrying out
the interim planning and reporting activities required under
subsection (a), in addition to other guidance as required for
implementation of this Act.

SEC. 15. CONGRESSIONAL OVERSIGHT AND LEGISLATION.

(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed as
limiting the ability of Congress to establish, amend,
suspend, or annul a goal of the Federal Government or an
agency.
(b) GAO Reviews.--
(1) Interim planning and reporting evaluation.--Not later
than June 30, 2013, the Comptroller General shall submit a
report to Congress that includes--
(A) an evaluation of the implementation of the interim
planning and reporting activities conducted under section 14
of this Act; and
(B) any recommendations for improving implementation of
this Act as determined appropriate.
(2) Implementation evaluations.--
(A) In general.--The Comptroller General shall evaluate the
implementation of this Act subsequent to the interim planning
and reporting activities evaluated in the report submitted to
Congress under paragraph (1).
(B) Agency implementation.--
(i) Evaluations.--The Comptroller General shall evaluate
how implementation of this Act is affecting performance
management at the agencies described in section 901(b) of
title 31, United States Code, including whether performance
management is being used by those agencies to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of agency programs.
(ii) Reports.--The Comptroller General shall submit to
Congress--

(I) an initial report on the evaluation under clause (i),
not later than September 30, 2015; and
(II) a subsequent report on the evaluation under clause
(i), not later than September 30, 2017.

(C) Federal government planning and reporting
implementation.--
(i) Evaluations.--The Comptroller General shall evaluate
the implementation of the Federal Government priority goals,
Federal Government performance plans and related reporting
required by this Act.
(ii) Reports.--The Comptroller General shall submit to
Congress--

(I) an initial report on the evaluation under clause (i),
not later than September 30, 2015; and
(II) subsequent reports on the evaluation under clause (i),
not later than September 30, 2017 and every 4 years
thereafter.

(D) Recommendations.--The Comptroller General shall include
in the reports required by subparagraphs (B) and (C) any
recommendations for improving implementation of this Act and
for streamlining the planning and reporting requirements of
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993.

Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, I rise to offer new legislation that I
urge all my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to support. I am
pleased to be joined by Senators Carper, Akaka, Lieberman, Collins, and
Voinovich as original cosponsors of this bill. The legislation we offer
today, the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act of
2010, is directly aimed at improving operations and quantifying results
across the Federal Government.
I think most of my colleagues know I am a business guy. In fact, I
have spent more time in the business world than in the public sector. I
have always tried to apply commonsense business practices to the work
of government, in my former job as Virginia Governor and now as
Senator. This is a point I think most of us on both sides of the aisle
would acknowledge: If I ran a business or if we ran any business the
way we run the Federal Government, I would be out of business in short
order. If we do not change--as we hear the kinds of folks across
America say: We want to see more efficiency from our Federal
Government--if we do not change, our government might get run out of
business as well.

As chair of the Budget Committee Task Force on Government
Performance, over the last 18 months I have been looking into how we
use data and information to improve government operations. Over the
last year, our task force has held a series of hearings, meetings, and
conversations with public and private sector leaders from every level
of government to learn more about what works and what does not work.
Here is what we have learned.
At the beginning of every President's administration, it seems an
entirely new performance agenda is established. The Bush administration
had the President's Management Agenda, and the current administration
has its own accountable government initiatives. With this frequent
change in approach every 4 to 8 years, it is difficult to ensure that
we are consistent in the data we collect, use the best tools and
technology to analyze it, and then put the necessary accountability in
place to orderly track performance and the basic functions of what
government does. Let me give you a couple examples.
Agencies produce literally thousands of pages of data each year, but
too often we do not use it. We do not use it in Congress. Public
interest groups do

[[Page S7630]]

not use it. Enormous efforts are put into collecting this data, and
then it sits on the shelf. Typically, this performance data is only
reported once a year, so it is often too late by the time we discover
whether we are improving or falling behind.
We also do not compare the results of similar programs. Too often, so
many of our government functions are siloed by agency or Department and
rarely is this data analyzed in any kind of crosscutting fashion. We in
the task force took a look at this. We looked, for example, at
workforce training programs across the Federal Government. We are
currently funding 44 separate Federal programs in 9 different
departments to support workforce training. We all would agree that in a
changing world, workforce training is key to America's competitiveness.
But 44 programs in 9 different departments without any kind of
crosscutting analysis? No business could operate that way. And it is
not just workforce training. In food safety--a piece of legislation
that we are working on that I and I know the Presiding Officer hope we
pass before the end of the year to put new food safety standards in
place--in food safety, we currently fund 17 different entities within 7
different departments involved in food safety activities. So how can we
assess what is working and what is not working?
In short, government operates in silos. We report by agency and by
program, but we do not know what we are doing in government in any
particular project area or specific policy goal area. We need a better
system that enables us to review the results of each program as a whole
in terms of how they feed into a policy objective, where we are having
the most impact, and, candidly, where we could find some room to cut or
curtail.
Our Federal performance system also needs to increase the
accountability of senior agency leadership. In many agencies, the
performance planning and reporting is disconnected from the senior
officials and not part of the daily operations of the agency. In other
words, somebody's got this task, but their functions of performance
audits and measurements and metrics do not have a direct line of
reporting to whoever the chief operating officer of the particular
agency is.
I can say that at the State and local level, we have actually made
some progress in changing this around. Let me parochially start with
what we did in Virginia. This chart I have in the Chamber is a little
bit busy, but we created a Virginia Performs Web site. We use this to
track progress we are making in key policy areas that are important to
Virginians. So whether it is the economy, education--and we set
commonsense goals that everyone can agree on across party lines, and
then we look at the measurement criteria that lead to that goal. This
is one of the reasons Virginia has earned the recognition as the best
managed State in the country.
It is not just happening in Virginia, though. In Indiana, a different
tool has been created. It is called the Transparency Portal by GOV
Mitch Daniels. It again tries to bring transparency to the policy
goals. Then we can argue about how we get there or how we ought to fund
how we get there. But unless we have common agreement on the goal and
then see which programs lead to that goal and measure the effectiveness
of the individual programs, we are not going to get, particularly in
these budget-constrained times, the best value for our Federal tax
dollar.
I believe Washington has much to learn from these local and State
level examples in setting goals, holding managers accountable, and
using performance metrics in a consistent, user-friendly way. State and
local decisionmakers do not have to wait to look at the results once a
year. They do it constantly. That is what we did in Virginia. That is
what we need to do in our Nation's Capital as well.
In addition to this reporting and crosscutting, we also need to
recognize that not all of these burdensome reporting requirements are
of equal value. So the task force has focused on reducing reporting
requirements to identify what reporting might be consolidated or
eliminated. If you get overwhelmed with data at certain points, the
data becomes somewhat less useful. So we want to focus these agencies
on what are the key determinants on which they ought to report. I do
not want to just add new reports and data requirements on agencies.
There are bookshelves all over this town sagging from the weight of
unread reports. So we must streamline and modernize what we are
currently doing, and we need to examine outdated and overlapping agency
reporting. We should only collect information that is useful.
The Government Performance and Results Modernization Act addresses
many of our findings to improve the operations and results across
government.
First, it will require all agencies to produce real-time data on
results. As I mentioned earlier, in the past, agencies would report on
performance only once a year. This bill would require agencies to post
results quarterly so the public and Congress can use that real-time
information about what works on targeted goals. With today's technology
and if you are collecting data on an ongoing basis, there is no reason
we should have this information only come out once a year. A quarterly
requirement will allow us to correct and fine-tune on an ongoing basis.
Second, the bill requires agencies to post data on a single public
Web site. This Web site will contain performance information from
across government so we can see how we are performing and how national
priorities such as education, public health, and safety, are being met.
Again, I go back to Virginia Performs, which works. You agree on a top-
line policy goal, and then you see across agencies how all these
different programs feed in. So posting this on a single public Web site
rather than having Members of Congress or the public sort through the
myriad of sites right now is a step in the right direction.
Third, agencies will be required to identify low-priority programs
that are not adequately contributing to the overall results. Now, this
is controversial. Every agency likes to talk about its best performing
programs. No agency likes to talk about which programs really are not
getting the job done. But as we face increasingly budget constraining
times, we must make sure we look not only at the winners but that we
have the agencies themselves put forward those areas where programs are
not meeting the goals.
Fourth, we need to take important steps to improve the accountability
of the senior officers in government agencies. We formally establish
that agency deputy secretaries are the chief operating officers and
hold them accountable for the results the agencies are looking for.
Again, you have to have a chain of command so somebody knows who is the
chief operating officer and those people who are performing are
responsible and those metrics are reported to that chief operating
officer. We also establish a performance improvement officer who
reports directly to the COO and, again, works across agencies to meet
our crosscutting goals.
We also feel these efforts will generate ``back office'' savings, and
we have as a policy goal--I do not believe this will be a stretch--a
literally 10-percent reduction in written reports.
We sometimes get overloaded with data. We want to fine-tune the data.
We want to make sure the more useful data is reported on a more regular
basis, that extraneous amounts--some of the kind of burdensome stuff
that has been put in in the past that may no longer be relevant--we
want to eliminate. And within the agency, we want to make sure there is
a clear chain of command.
I think the Government Performance and Results Modernization Act
moves us forward in a major way. So this legislation--commonsense
business practices, bipartisan, in an effort that will meet the 10-
percent reduction in agency reports; the effort, finally, to make sure
we can look at policy goals not by individual department or agency but
across programmatic areas; the same kinds of business techniques that
are used in Fortune 500 companies all across America and, for that
matter, all across the world--will bring these best practices into the
Federal Government and make sure we do not have this kind of start-and-
stop effort that has, unfortunately, plagued modernization efforts over
the past.
I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle--since this is
bipartisan supported--to join in this effort. As we think about many of
the major issues

[[Page S7631]]

that we kind of fight through in these remaining days of this Congress,
I hope, for this kind of commonsense piece of legislation, that we
could get the time needed to get it passed. Again, I urge my colleagues
to join us in this effort.
Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I am pleased to join Senators Carper,
Warner, Collins, Lieberman, and Voinovich in introducing the GPRA
Modernization Act of 2010.
As an original cosponsor of the Government Performance and Results
Act of 1993, often referred to as GPRA or the Results Act, I believe
the time has come to refine and enhance this landmark bill.
President Obama, in his inaugural address, observed:

The question we ask today is not whether our government is
too big or too small but whether it works.

This question captures the essence of what the Results Act seeks to
achieve. While the original Results Act made significant progress in
encouraging agencies to develop a results-oriented culture, it is time
to modernize GPRA. Several long-standing challenges hinder agency
efforts to answer this critical question. Our legislation is a
bipartisan effort to empower agencies to overcome these challenges and
better evaluate how to use taxpayer dollars in the most efficient and
effective way possible.
Prior to 1993, Congress had never enacted a statutory framework for
strategic planning, goal setting, or performance measurement. According
to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, before GPRA, few agencies
had results-oriented performance information to manage or make
strategic policy decisions. The Results Act was a bipartisan effort
that succeeded in establishing a comprehensive and consistent statutory
foundation of required agency strategic plans, annual performance
plans, and annual performance reports. GPRA is and must remain a
cornerstone of the Federal Government's efforts to strengthen strategic
planning across all agencies.
Lessons learned from nearly two decades worth of experience
implementing the Results Act, informed by numerous GAO reports and
recommendations; confirm the need to strengthen the statutory framework
established by GPRA.
The legislation we offer today draws on this experience, applying
lessons learned to amend GPRA to address the limitations identified by
GAO and other observers. I will highlight a few of the important
provisions in this bill.
Our bill requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
to develop a Federal Government performance plan and to coordinate with
agencies to develop Federal Government priority goals for management
and policy issues that cut across agencies. This provision addresses a
long-standing GAO recommendation that the Federal Government develop a
government-wide performance plan to provide OMB, agencies, and
Congress, with a structured framework for addressing crosscutting
policy initiatives and program efforts.
This legislation also strengthens the congressional consultation
provisions to require agencies consult with Congress when developing
strategic plans and identifying priority goals. GAO has found that
regular consultation with Congress about the content and format of
strategic and performance plans is critical to ensure that both the
executive and legislative branches are engaged in improving government
performance. Full congressional buy-in is a key element to building a
sustainable performance management framework.
Our legislative proposal also addresses performance management skills
and competencies, which GAO has identified as a critical factor in
determining an agency's success in utilizing performance management
systems. A 2007 GAO survey of Federal managers found nearly half
reported not receiving training that would assist in utilizing
performance information. Our bill addresses this training deficit by
requiring the Director of the Office of Personnel Management to
identify key performance management skills and competencies and
incorporate them into relevant position classifications and training
curricula.
Congress has a responsibility to promote effective performance
management to enable Federal agencies to spend taxpayer dollars wisely,
while carrying out critical missions. The GPRA Modernization Act is an
important step towards accomplishing this goal, and I urge my
colleagues to support this legislation.
______

By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Whitehouse, and Mr. Kaufman):
S. 3854. A bill to expand the definition of scheme or artifice to
defraud with respect to mail and wire fraud; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today, I am pleased to introduce the Honest
Services Restoration Act with Senator Whitehouse and Senator Kaufman.
The legislation will restore critical tools used by investigators and
prosecutors to combat public corruption and corporate fraud, which the
Supreme Court dramatically weakened in Skilling v. United States.
In Skilling, the Court sided with an Enron executive who had been
convicted of fraud, and in doing so, held that the honest services
fraud statute may be used to prosecute only bribery and kickbacks, but
no other conduct. That leaves other corrupt and fraudulent conduct
which prosecutors in the past addressed under the honest services fraud
statute to go unchecked. Most notably, the Court's decision excluded
undisclosed ``self-dealing'' by state and federal public officials, and
corporate officers and directors, which is when those officials or
executives secretly act in their own financial self-interest, rather
than in the interest of the public or, in the private sector cases,
their shareholders and employees. The Honest Services Restoration Act
restores the honest services statute to cover this undisclosed ``self-
dealing'' by state and Federal public officials, and corporate officers
and directors.
In a hearing earlier today, the Judiciary Committee heard testimony
from experts who explored the kinds of problematic conduct that may now
go unchecked in the wake of the Skilling decision. The testimony also
considered what Congress can and should do to fill those gaps and
restore strong enforcement to combat corrupt and fraudulent conduct.
It is clear that in recent years, the stain of corruption has spread
to all levels of government. This is a problem that victimizes every
American by chipping away at the foundations of our democracy and the
faith that Americans have in their government. Recent years have also
seen a plague of financial and corporate frauds that have severely
undermined our economy and hurt too many hardworking people in this
country. These frauds have robbed people of their savings, their
retirement accounts, college funds for their children, and have cost
too many people their homes.
Congress has acted, by passing the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act
and other key provisions, to give prosecutors and investigators more
tools to combat fraud. But we must remain vigilant, as the methods and
techniques used by those who would defraud hardworking Americans
continue to change. Too often, loopholes in existing laws have meant
that corrupt conduct can go unchecked. The honest services fraud
statute has enabled prosecutors to root out corrupt and fraudulent
conduct that would otherwise slip through those loopholes; we must
tighten it so it can perform that important role again.
Congress must act aggressively but carefully to strengthen our laws
to root out corruption and fraud. By preventing public officials and
corporate executives from acting in their own self-interest at the
expense of the people they serve, the Honest Services Restoration Act
closes a gap created by Skilling and strengthens a critical law
enforcement tool. I look forward to working with Senators from both
parties to quickly pass this bill.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be
printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:

S. 3854

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 ``Honest Services Restoration
Act''.

[[Page S7632]]

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18.

(a) In General.--Chapter 63 of title 18, United States
Code, is amended by inserting after section 1346 the
following:

``Sec. 1346A. Definition of `scheme or artifice to defraud'

``(a) For purposes of this chapter, the term `scheme or
artifice to defraud' also includes--
``(1) a scheme or artifice by a public official to engage
in undisclosed self-dealing; or
``(2) a scheme or artifice by officers and directors to
engage in undisclosed private self-dealing.
``(b)(1) In subsection (a)(1)--
``(A) the term `undisclosed self-dealing' means that--
``(i) a public official performs an official act for the
purpose, in whole or in part, of benefitting or furthering a
financial interest of--
``(I) the public official;
``(II) the public official's spouse or minor child;
``(III) a general partner of the public official;
``(IV) a business or organization in which the public
official is serving as an employee, officer, director,
trustee, or general partner;
``(V) an individual, business, or organization with whom
the public official is negotiating for, or has any
arrangement concerning, prospective employment or financial
compensation; or
``(VI) a person, business, or organization from whom the
public official has received a thing of value or a series of
things of value, otherwise than as provided by law for the
proper discharge of official duty, or by rule or regulation;
and
``(ii) the public official knowingly falsifies, conceals,
or covers up material information that is required to be
disclosed regarding that financial interest by any Federal,
State, or local statute, rule, regulation, or charter
applicable to the public official, or knowingly fails to
disclose material information regarding that financial
interest in a manner that is required by any Federal, State,
or local statute, rule, regulation, or charter applicable to
the public official;
``(B) the term `public official' means an officer,
employee, or elected or appointed representative, or person
acting for or on behalf of the United States, a State, or
subdivision of a State, or any department, agency, or branch
thereof, in any official function, under or by authority of
any such department agency or branch of Government;
``(C) the term `official act'--
``(i) includes any act within the range of official duty,
and any decision, recommendation, or action on any question,
matter, cause, suit, proceeding, or controversy, which may at
any time be pending, or which may by law be brought before
any public official, in such public official's official
capacity or in such official's place of trust or profit;
``(ii) can be a single act, more than one act, or a course
of conduct; and
``(iii) includes a decision or recommendation that the
Government should not take action; and
``(D) the term `State' includes a State of the United
States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth,
territory, or possession of the United States.
``(2) In subsection (a)(2)--
``(A) the term `undisclosed private self-dealing' means
that--
``(i) an officer or director performs an act which causes
or is intended to cause harm to the officer's or director's
employer, and which is undertaken in whole or in part to
benefit or further by an actual or intended value of $5,000
or more a financial interest of--
``(I) the officer or director;
``(II) the officer or director's spouse or minor child;
``(III) a general partner of the officer or director;
``(IV) another business or organization in which the public
official is serving as an employee, officer, director,
trustee, or general partner; or
``(V) an individual, business, or organization with whom
the officer or director is negotiating for, or has any
arrangement concerning, prospective employment or financial
compensation; and
``(ii) the officer or director knowingly falsifies,
conceals, or covers up material information that is required
to be disclosed regarding that financial interest by any
Federal, State, or local statute, rule, regulation, or
charter applicable to the officer or director, or knowingly
fails to disclose material information regarding that
financial interest in a manner that is required by any
Federal, State, or local statute, rule, regulation, or
charter applicable to the officer or director;
``(B) the term `employer' includes publicly traded
corporations, and private charities under section 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; and
``(C) the term `act' includes a decision or recommendation
to take, or not to take action, and can be a single act, more
than one act, or a course of conduct.''.
(b) Chapter Analysis.--The chapter analysis for chapter 63
of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting
after the item for section 1346 the following:

``Sec. 1346A. Definition of `scheme or artifice to defraud'.''.
______

By Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, Mrs.
Murray, and Mr. Sanders):
S. 3855. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal
the limitation on the issuance of new clean renewable energy bonds and
to terminate eligibility of governmental bodies to issue such bonds,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.
Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, today I am introducing legislation that
will unleash a wave of investment in clean renewable energy. The Clean
Renewable Energy Investment Act of 2010 will remove the arbitrary cap
on the amount of Clean Renewable Energy Bonds that can be issued by our
Nation's consumer-owned public power providers and cooperative electric
companies. This legislation will generate significant private
investment in renewable energy projects that will create thousands of
jobs nationwide.
Congress first created Clean Renewable Energy Bonds, or ``CREBs'' in
2005 in an attempt to parallel the tax incentive offered by the Section
45 tax credit for electricity produced from renewable resources.
However, the incentives for consumer-owned utilities have never been
truly comparable to the subsidy we provide to for-profit, investor-
owned utilities because unlike the section 45 tax credit, CREBs have
always been subject to an overall cap on the amount of bonds that can
be issued nationwide.
Since consumer-owned utilities operate on a not-for-profit basis and
incur no Federal income tax liability, traditional production tax
credits otherwise available to for-profit utilities simply do not
work--because there is no Federal tax liability to offset with the
credit. Yet the nearly 3,000 public power utilities and rural electric
cooperatives collectively serve 25 percent of the Nation's electricity
customers. These utilities are often ideally situated in terms of both
geography and size to integrate clean and renewable technologies into
their systems.
The original CREB program has been extended twice and was modified in
the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 to make it more
workable for public power and more attractive to institutional
investors. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act and the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 provided for an additional $2.4
billion in CREB funding split equally between public power providers,
rural electric cooperatives, and other governmental bodies. In March
2010, Congress passed another very useful modification to the CREB
program by giving issuers of CREBs the option to issue the bonds as
``direct-pay bonds'', similar to the structure of Build America Bonds.
In the last round of CREBs, the demand for projects significantly
exceeded the availability of the limited $800 million for each category
of issuer. Public power and electric cooperative utilities have
billions of dollars in projects awaiting these incentives--with some
even having the potential to use $800 million for a single project if
given the opportunity.
This means we have an opportunity to unleash a wave of investments in
clean energy. In Washington State, 50 percent of customers are served
by public power providers. Nationwide, public power and cooperatives
serve one in four electricity customers. Yet, if we look back over the
history of the Section 45 tax credit and CREBs, Congress typically
shortchanges the consumer-owned sector. Looking at the Joint Committee
on Taxations estimates of the cost of all the major energy tax
legislation since 2005, the resources allocated to CREBs have been
roughly \1/10\ of the cost of extending or expanding, section 45.
My legislation would correct this inconsistency in our energy policy
by removing the arbitrary cap on the volume of CREBs that can be
issued, and would instead sunset the CREB program at the end of 2013,
which is consistent with the expiration of most components of the
section 45 credit.
It would also remove the ``governmental bodies'' category from
eligibility for the bonds. The CREB program was originally developed
for utility-scale projects and this amendment reflects that intent and
puts the program in line with the Production Tax Credit for investor-
owned utilities. Since passage of the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act, Governmental bodies now have their own bond program.
They are eligible for the new Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds,

[[Page S7633]]

QECBs, which is a more suitable program for these entities as they can
finance both renewable and energy efficiency projects with QECBs. Under
this legislation, Tribal utilities would remain eligible issuers of
CREBs.
In addition, the bill clarifies that any reimbursement with bond
proceeds is governed by the reimbursement rules applicable to tax-
exempt bonds. It is widely recognized in the public finance community
that the existing wording in Section 54A(d)(2)(D) is at best unclear,
and at worst incorrect. State and local government issuers of bonds are
familiar with the reimbursement rules applicable to tax-exempt bonds
and there is no tax policy reason to have two sets of reimbursement
rules.
Finally, the bill insures that any new CREBs allocated before the
date of enactment of this bill are not affected by any of these
amendments. The intent is to ensure that the ``government bodies''
category is still able to issue previously allocated CREBs and will not
be retroactively cut out of the program.
This bill is good energy policy because it will lead to the
development of thousands of megawatts of renewable power. It is good
tax policy because it maintains the integrity of the CREBs program, and
it is overall good public policy because it provides parity between
investor-owned and consumer-owned utilities.
______

By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mrs. Gillibrand, and Mr. Schumer):
S. 3858. A bill to improve the H-2A agricultural worker program for
use by dairy workers, sheepherders, and goat herders, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, in these challenging economic times, dairy
farmers in Vermont, New York, and across America are experiencing
particularly difficult conditions. They face both rock-bottom milk
prices, and a severe labor shortage. There is an immediate solution for
one of these issues. Labor shortages could be met with foreign
agricultural workers under a special visa program, called H-2A, which
allows farmers who are unable to fill labor needs with domestic workers
to hire temporary or seasonal foreign workers. I have long sought to
include dairy farmers in the H-2A program, but the Department of Labor
has consistently refused to interpret the law to allow dairy farmers
access to seasonal foreign workers.
Last fall, the Department of Labor initiated a rulemaking process to
reconsider various aspects of the H-2A program. I repeatedly urged the
Department to exercise its authority to give dairy farmers access to H-
2A workers, both through comments I submitted in the formal rulemaking
and by supporting the comments of the National Milk Producers
Federation.
Nonetheless, on February 11, 2010, the Department released a final
rule that continues to exclude the dairy industry from this valuable
program. Inexplicably, while refusing to include the dairy industry
because of its year-round needs, the Department of Labor extends new
access to the H-2A program to the logging industry, and continues to
offer access to these purportedly seasonal worker visas to the year-
round sheepherding industry.
Today, I introduce the H-2A Improvement Act with Senators Gillibrand
and Schumer. This bill will finally end the inequity under current law.
The H-2A Improvement Act will make explicit in law that dairy farms can
use the H-2A program, ensuring that dairy farmers in Vermont, New York,
and throughout the Nation can find the labor they need to stay in
business, meeting the needs of their communities and American families.
This legislation, which also gives statutory access to the H-2A program
to sheep herders and goat herders, contains provisions to ensure that
the benefit that these workers provide to farmers is maximized. The
legislation authorizes this unique class of workers to remain in the
United States for an initial period of 3 years, and gives U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services the authority to approve a worker
for an additional 3-year period as needed. After the initial 3-year
period, the worker may petition to become a lawful permanent resident.
The failure to allow the dairy industry to participate in the H-2A
program puts many dairy farmers in the situation of having to choose
between their livelihoods and following the law. Late last year, the
Department of Homeland Security audited at least four dairy farms in
Vermont. Although I strongly believe that the vast majority of dairy
farmers want to hire a lawful workforce, there is a critical shortage
of domestic workers available to work on dairy farms. Dairy farmers are
often ill-equipped to verify the authenticity of documents that job
applicants present. As a result, some of the workers the farmers hire
may not be lawfully authorized to work. With all the challenges facing
dairy farmers today, we should help dairy farmers hire lawful workers,
not leave them with the precarious choice of hiring workers who may be
unauthorized, or hiring no workers at all.
Expanding the H-2A program to include dairy workers would protect
both American and foreign workers. It would protect American workers
from having to compete with an unlawful work force, in which
unscrupulous employers pay lower wages in often unsafe conditions. At
the same time, it would protect foreign dairy workers, by requiring
that employers comply with existing H-2A regulations and wage and hour
and occupational safety laws. This legislation, if enacted, would give
foreign workers who seek employment in the dairy industry the dignity
and certainty of lawful status and the opportunity to be productive
members of the communities in which they work.
In 2006 and 2007, I worked to include nearly identical provisions in
the Senate's comprehensive immigration bills. This legislation reflects
those provisions. The measure I introduce today is a simple, targeted
fix to our immigration laws that will enable dairy farmers to gain the
benefits of this important program. While I recognize that many
agricultural employers are frustrated by the current regulatory
process, it is a critical first step, and a matter of basic fairness
that dairy farmers are afforded the same opportunities to obtain labor
as all other agricultural sectors.
Although this legislation is necessary to meet the immediate needs of
dairy farmers, I also want to make absolutely clear that I remain in
complete support of the more comprehensive AgJOBS legislation, which I
joined Senator Feinstein in introducing last year, and on which Senator
Feinstein and others have worked tirelessly. I will continue to
strongly support that legislation, and Senator Feinstein in her efforts
to see it enacted. AgJOBS is broader than the H-2A Improvement Act. It
reforms the broader H-2A program to cover agricultural workers that are
currently assisting American farmers, but who are not lawfully
authorized to work. It also makes important, negotiated changes to
streamline the H-2A regulatory process for employers and workers. I
recognize that farmers across the country need a comprehensive
solution--from Vermont's small dairy farms to the vast fields of
California. The solution that the AgJOBS legislation proposes will
benefit agriculture across the Nation and is a solution I remain
committed to making a reality.
I will also continue to work with Senate leadership and Senators from
both sides of the aisle to accomplish our shared goals for broader
reform of our Nation's immigration system. In the meantime, America's
dairy farmers must at least be placed on the same footing as other
agricultural interests with respect to our current H-2A laws.
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. 3858

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 ``H-2A Improvement Act''.

SEC. 2. NONIMMIGRANT STATUS FOR DAIRY WORKERS, SHEEPHERDERS,
AND GOAT HERDERS.

Section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a)) is amended
by inserting ``who is coming temporarily to the United States
to perform agricultural labor or services as a dairy worker,
sheepherder, or goat herder, or'' after ``abandoning''.

[[Page S7634]]

SEC. 3. SPECIAL RULES FOR ALIENS EMPLOYED AS DAIRY WORKERS,
SHEEPHERDERS, OR GOAT HERDERS.

Section 218 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8
U.S.C. 1188) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (h) and (i) as subsections
(i) and (j), respectively;
(2) by inserting after subsection (g) the following:
``(h) Special Rules for Aliens Employed as Dairy Workers,
Sheepherders, or Goat Herders.--
``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this Act, an alien admitted as a nonimmigrant under section
101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a) for employment as a dairy worker,
sheepherder, or goat herder--
``(A) may be admitted for an initial period of 3 years; and
``(B) subject to paragraph (3)(E), may have such initial
period of admission extended for an additional period of up
to 3 years.
``(2) Exemption from temporary or seasonal requirement.--
Not withstanding section 101(a)(15)(H)(ii)(a), an employer
filing a petition to employ H-2A workers in positions as
dairy workers, sheepherders, or goat herders shall not be
required to show that such positions are of a seasonal or
temporary nature.
``(3) Adjustment to lawful permanent resident status.--
``(A) Eligible alien.--In this paragraph, the term
`eligible alien' means an alien who--
``(i) has H-2A worker status based on employment as a dairy
worker, sheepherder, or goat herder;
``(ii) has maintained such status in the United States for
a not fewer than 33 of the preceding 36 months; and
``(iii) is seeking to receive an immigrant visa under
section 203(b)(3)(A)(iii).
``(B) Classification petition.--A petition under section
204 for classification of an eligible alien under section
203(b)(3)(A)(iii) may be filed by--
``(i) the alien's employer on behalf of the eligible alien;
or
``(ii) the eligible alien.
``(C) No labor certification required.--Notwithstanding
section 203(b)(3)(C), no determination under section
212(a)(5)(A) is required with respect to an immigrant visa
under section 203(b)(3)(A)(iii) for an eligible alien.
``(D) Effect of petition.--The filing of a petition
described in subparagraph (B) or an application for
adjustment of status based on a petition described in
subparagraph (B) shall not be a basis fo denying--
``(i) another petition to employ H-2A workers;
``(ii) an extension of nonimmigrant status for a H-2A
worker;
``(iii) admission of an alien as an H-2A worker;
``(iv) a request for a visa for an H-2A worker;
``(v) a request from an alien to modify the alien's
immigration status to or from status as an H-2A worker; or
``(vi) a request made for an H-2A worker to extend such
worker's stay in the United Stats.
``(E) Extension of stay.--The Secretary of Homeland
Security shall extend the stay of an eligible alien having a
pending or approved petition described in subparagraph (B) in
1-year increments until a final determination is made on the
alien's eligibility for adjustment of status to that of an
alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.
``(F) Construction.--Nothing in this paragraph may be
construed to prevent an eligible alien from seeking
adjustment of status in accordance with any other provision
of law.''; and
(3) in subsection (j)(1), as redesignated by paragraph (1),
by striking ``The term'' and inserting ``Except as provided
under subsection (h)(2)(A), the term''.
______

By Mr. INOUYE:
S. 3859. A bill to express the sense of the Senate concerning the
establishment of Doctor of Nursing Practice and doctor of Pharmacy dual
degree programs; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions.
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, today I rise to recognize the need for a
health care professional skilled in caring for the specific needs of a
growing elderly population. In the next 30 years we will see a unique
change in population demographics in this country. The geriatric
population is increasing and by the year 2030, the over 65 age group
will make up 20 percent of the population. More people will reach the
100-year mark. My home State of Hawai`i is home to more 100-year olds
per capita than any other State. The risk for developing disease and
illness becomes greater as one ages. As we see an increase in the age
of our population, those living with chronic illnesses such as
cardiovascular disease, respiratory diseases, diabetes and cancer, will
continue to rise in numbers as well. These are patient's who require
care in the ambulatory, hospital, and home care settings. The
chronically ill geriatric patients usually are living with multiple co-
morbidities and possess poly pharmacy challenges. We are living in a
time when it is crucial to develop the skills and expertise to care for
these patients and provide them with the quality health care they
deserve in a cost effective manner.
While the terms dual, joint, double or combined degrees are used
interchangeably, the overall definition is students working for two
different and distinct degrees in parallel, completing two degrees in
less time than it would take to complete each separately. Under the
leadership of Katharyn F. Daub, EdD, CTN, CNE, Director School of
Nursing, John M. Pezzuto, Ph.D., Dean, College of Pharmacy, and Donald
O. Straney, Ph.D., Chancellor, University of Hawai`i at Hilo, the
University of Hawai`i at Hilo has created a model that would partner
both their school of nursing and pharmacy to meet the needs of the
changing health care field through the implementation of a dual-degree
program that would combine a Doctor of Nursing Practice, DNP, with a
Doctor of Pharmacy, PharmD.
The overall purpose of this innovative cross cutting dual or joint
degree nursing program is to prepare nurses to expand the traditional
scope of nursing practice, with the goal of strengthening health care
teams. The American Association of Colleges of Nursing, AACN, 2009
survey of schools of nursing documents that there are over 100 nursing
schools that offer dual degree programs: 74 MSN/MBA programs; 34 MSN/
MPH programs; 10 MSN/MHA programs; 5 MSN/MPA programs; 4 MSN/MDIV
programs; and 3 MSN/JD programs. Currently there is no dual degree
program that combines nursing and pharmacology.
Through this dual collaborative role we would be able to meet the
unique needs of rural communities across age continuums and in diverse
settings. The nurse/pharmacist would enhance collaboration between DNPs
and physicians regarding drug therapy. The program also would provide
for the implementation of safer medication administration. It would
broaden the scope of practice for pharmacists through education and
training in diagnosis and management of common acute and chronic
diseases, and create new employment opportunities for private physician
or nurse managed clinics, walk-in clinics, school/college clinics,
long-term facilities, veteran administration facilities, hospitals and
hospital clinics, hospice centers, home health care agencies,
pharmaceutical companies, emergency departments, urgent care sites,
physician group practices, extended care facilities, and research
centers.
Additional research and evaluation would determine the extent of
which graduates of this program improve primary health care, address
disparities, diversify the workforce, and increase quality of service
for underserved populations.
I urge you to consider the benefits of the development of a joint
degree in nursing and pharmacology.
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. 3859

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Doctor of Nursing Practice
and Doctor of Pharmacy Dual Degree Program Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

The Senate makes the following findings:
(1) The terms dual, joint, double or combined degrees are
used interchangeably, the overall definition is students
working for two different and distinct degrees in parallel,
completing two degrees in less time than it would take to
complete each separately.
(2) The overall purpose of the innovative cross cutting
dual or joint degree nursing programs is to prepare nurses to
expand the traditional scope of nursing practice, with the
goal of strengthening health care teams.
(3) The American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN)
2009 survey of schools of nursing documents that there are
over 100 nursing schools that offer dual degree programs of
which 74 are MSN/MBA programs, 34 are MSN/MPH programs, 10
are MSN/MHA programs, 5 are MSN/MPA programs, 4 are MSN/MDIV
programs, and 3 are MSN/JD programs.
(4) There is currently no dual degree program that combines
nursing and pharmacology.
(5) Recently, the University of Hawai`i at Hilo has
explored the option of nursing and pharmacy partnering to
meet the needs of the changing health care field.

[[Page S7635]]

SEC. 3. SENSE OF THE SENATE.

It is the sense of the Senate that--
(1) there should be established a Doctor of Nursing
Practice (DNP) and Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) dual degree
program;
(2) the development of a joint degree in nursing and
pharmacology should combine a Doctor of Nursing Practice
(DNP) with a Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD);
(3) the significance of such a dual degree program would be
improving patient outcomes;
(4) through such a dual collaborative role, health
providers will be better able to meet the unique needs of
rural communities across the age continuum and in diverse
settings;
(5) such a dual degree program--
(A) would enhance collaboration between Doctors of Nursing
Practice and physicians regarding drug therapy;
(B) would provide for research concerning, and the
implementation of, safer medication administration;
(C) would broaden the scope of practice for pharmacists
through education and training in diagnosis and management of
common acute and chronic diseases;
(D) would provide new employment opportunities for private
physician or nurse managed clinics, walk-in clinics, school
or college clinics, long-term care facilities, Veteran
Administration facilities, hospitals and hospital clinics,
hospice centers, home health care agencies, pharmaceutical
companies, emergency departments, urgent care sites,
physician group practices, extended care facilities, and
research centers; and
(E) would assist in filling the need for primary care
providers with an expertise in geriatrics and
pharmaceuticals; and
(6) additional research and evaluation should be conducted
to determine the extent to which graduates of such a dual
degree program improve primary health care, address
disparities, diversify the workforce, and increase quality of
service for underserved populations.
______

By Mr. ROCKEFELLER:
S. 3863. A bill to designate certain Federal land within the
Monongahela National Forest as a component of the National Wilderness
Preservation System, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Energy
and Natural Resources.
Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the
Monongahela Conservation Legacy Act of 2010. This important piece of
legislation sets aside 6,042 acres of the Monongahela National Forest
on North Fork Mountain in Grant County, WV, to be included in the
National Wilderness Preservation System.
West Virginians have a proud tradition of mining and logging that
provides needed resources for our entire country. I have no doubt that
this tradition will continue for many decades to come. However, at the
same time, new development is coming to West Virginia. This is needed
development that provides jobs for West Virginians and helps support
our economy. But with this increased development comes a responsibility
to set aside some part of our natural environment for those who come
after us.
The Monongahela National Forest encompasses nearly 920,000 acres of
land in the heart of the Appalachian Mountain Range and contains some
of the most ecologically diverse regions in the country. North Fork
Mountain is one of these incredible areas and has earned the Forest
Service's highest rating for Natural Integrity in its Wilderness
Attribute Rating System. The mountain is a nesting site for peregrine
falcons and home to 120 rare plants, animals, and natural communities.
With this wilderness designation all of these ecological treasures will
be permanently protected.
Over the years I have heard from hundreds of West Virginians about
how important wilderness is to them. I have heard from West Virginians
who want to make sure that they will be able to continue to fish
pristine streams and hunt in the forests. Wilderness is a major draw
for the outdoor tourism industry and will provide jobs.
Finally, I want to extend my thanks to Congressman Mollohan, who has
introduced identical legislation in the House of Representatives, for
his leadership on this issue. I will continue to work with all
stakeholders involved to move this legislation forward and to address
any concerns while ensuring the preservation of this truly special
place.

____________________