[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.''.

       (c) The table of contents for chapter 11 of title 31, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

``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.

                          ____________________