[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 188 (Thursday, November 16, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7298-S7303]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
______
By Mr. VAN HOLLEN (for himself, Mr. Kaine, Mrs. Capito, Mr.
Casey, Mr. Manchin, Mr. Cardin, Mr. Warner, Mr. Carper, Mr.
Coons, and Mrs. Gillibrand):
S. 2139. A bill to amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to address
critical conservation conditions under the regional conservation
partnership program, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Chesapeake
Bay Farm Bill Enhancements Act of 2017 to accelerate our efforts to
restore the health of one of America's greatest natural treasures--the
Chesapeake Bay. This legislation will strengthen our Bay clean-up
program by increasing and better targeting resources under the Regional
Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP), which is administered by the
Department of Agriculture (USDA).
I have long advocated for more effective protection, preservation,
and restoration of the Chesapeake Bay. During the development of the
Farm Bill of 2008, I worked with my colleagues to adopt the Chesapeake
Bay Watershed Initiative, which provided assistance to farmers to help
them prevent the excessive runoff of nutrients and sediments into the
Bay and its tributaries. As a result of that initiative, about $50
million was invested annually in the Chesapeake Bay watershed.
In the 2014 Farm Bill, the RCPP was established to expand the
successful concept of the Chesapeake Bay Initiative to our vital
watersheds in the country. The goal of RCPP is to encourage
stakeholders to partner with agricultural producers to increase the
restoration and sustainable use of soil, water, wildlife and related
natural resources on regional or watershed scales.
Mr. President, while very successful nationally, the overall
investment in Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts through the RCPP has
been reduced relative to investments that were made under the stand-
alone Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative. That is why today I am
introducing the Chesapeake Bay Farm Bill Enhancements Act to make
refinements to the RCPP in order to improve conservation efforts in the
Chesapeake Bay--and other vital watersheds--through providing
additional funding, bolstering the role of critical conservation areas,
and improving technical assistance.
On funding, this bill will triple the amount of mandatory funding for
RCPP available per fiscal year from $100 million to $300 million. The
bill also allows in-kind support to count towards a partner's matching
contribution to a project.
The Chesapeake Bay has already been designated as a Critical
Conservation Area under the RCPP. However, my bill will make
refinements to the requirements for partnership agreements awarded
within Critical Conservation Areas that recognize key
[[Page S7299]]
strengths of the Chesapeake Bay region. For example, the bill will
strengthen the definitions of a critical conservation area to include
critical conservation conditions that would improve water quality and
water quantity. Furthermore, the bill adds a prioritization for
partnership agreement applications that implement the project
consistent with multi-State watershed restoration plans and bring
together a diverse array of stakeholders into a project.
I have heard from many organizations in my state and others states in
the Bay watershed that there is a significant need for better technical
assistance to better implement the RCPP. Therefore, my bill authorizes
the USDA to advance reasonable amounts of funding to eligible partners
for technical assistance. Also, the bill allows the USDA to provide
written feedback to applicants throughout the application process on
how the proposals can be improved.
Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined in introducing the bill by
Senator Cardin, a long-time supporter of the Chesapeake Bay. My other
Bay state colleagues, Senators Capito, Kaine, Casey, Manchin, Warner,
Carper, Coons and Gillibrand are also original cosponsors of the
Chesapeake Bay Farm Bill Enhancements Act. My former colleague
Congressman Bobby Scott is introducing a companion measure in the House
of Representatives. Furthermore, I am grateful that this bill has the
support of Maryland Governor Hogan, 4 other Governors within the
Chesapeake Bay Watershed, the Mayor of the District of Columbia, and
the Chesapeake Bay Commission. This bill is also supported by over 70
organizations such as the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, and Choose Clean
Water. Together, I look forward to working together to see the
inclusion of this important legislation in the next Farm Bill.
______
By Mr. RISCH:
S. 2140. A bill to provide for an exchange of Federal land and non-
Federal land in the State of Idaho, and for other purposes; to the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. RISCH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Blackrock
Land Exchange Act of 2017.
The legislation supports a mutually beneficial effort between the
Bureau of Land Management and the J.R. Simplot Company in Idaho that
began over 20 years ago. Simplot proposed an exchange of their
privately owned land with superior natural resources and recreational
opportunities for a similar sized parcel of BLM land adjacent to a
Simplot phosphate processing facility. This facility adds significant
value to the Pocatello, Idaho area as a large employer that sustains
over 350 jobs with an over $55 million annual economic impact.
In 2007, BLM issued a Final Decision Record on the Environmental
Assessment concluding the exchange would have no significant
environmental impact, which was reaffirmed in 2009 by the Department of
Interior Board of Land Appeals. However, the exchange has been held up
since 2011 due to the District Court for Idaho ruling that BLM needed
to prepare a full Environmental Impact Statement including detailed
future use to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969.
This raises the possibility of a dangerous precedent for future land
conveyances, as the exchange itself does not authorize further
activities. Future use of the proposed adjacent land by the phosphate
facility would still be subject to NEPA with opportunity for public
comment. Halting the Blackrock Land Exchange for this reason could
largely increase the scope, length, and cost of the NEPA process.
This bill will allow for this exchange in Idaho that has support
from--State and local government as well as various land users. It will
also protect future exchanges from cycles of unnecessary review and
litigation. The Blackrock Land Exchange Act of 2017 is in the best
interest of Idaho land users, local economies, and future utilization
of government land.
Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Booker, Mr.
Cardin, Mr. Coons, Ms. Duckworth, Mr. Franken, Mrs. Gillibrand,
Ms. Klobuchar, Mrs. Murray, Mr. Van Hollen, Mr. Whitehouse, and
Mr. Schatz):
S. 2148. A bill to authorize dedicated domestic terrorism offices
within the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Justice,
and the Federal Bureau of Investigation to analyze and monitor domestic
terrorist activity and require the Federal Government to take steps to
prevent domestic terrorism; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mr. DURBIN. 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. 2148
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 ``Domestic Terrorism
Prevention Act of 2017''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds the following:
(1) White supremacists and other right-wing extremists are
the most significant domestic terrorism threat facing the
United States.
(2) A 2009 report from the Extremism and Radicalization
Branch of the Department of Homeland Security concluded
``that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing
violent right-wing extremist ideology are the most dangerous
domestic terrorism threat in the United States''.
(3) An unclassified May 2017 joint intelligence bulletin
from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department
of Homeland Security found that ``white supremacist extremism
poses [a] persistent threat of lethal violence,'' and that
white supremacists ``were responsible for 49 homicides in 26
attacks from 2000 to 2016 . . . more than any other domestic
extremist movement''.
(4) According to the New America Foundation, since
September 11, 2001, 76 Americans have died in terrorist
attacks by domestic extremists in the United States. 89
percent were killed by far-right-wing extremists.
(5) The fatal attacks described in paragraph (4) include--
(A) the August 5, 2012, mass shooting at a Sikh gurdwara in
Oak Creek, Wisconsin, in which a white supremacist shot and
killed 6 members of the gurdwara;
(B) the April 13, 2014, mass shooting at a Jewish community
center and a Jewish assisted living facility in Overland
Park, Kansas, in which a neo-Nazi shot and killed 3
civilians, including a 14-year-old teenager;
(C) the June 8, 2014, ambush in Las Vegas, Nevada, in which
2 supporters of the far right-wing ``patriot'' movement shot
and killed 2 police officers and a civilian;
(D) the June 17, 2015, mass shooting at the Emanuel AME
Church in Charleston, South Carolina, in which a white
supremacist shot and killed 9 members of the church;
(E) the November 27, 2015, mass shooting at a Planned
Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, Colorado, in which an
anti-abortion extremist shot and killed a police officer and
2 civilians;
(F) the March 20, 2017, murder of an African-American man
in New York City, allegedly committed by a white supremacist
who reportedly traveled to New York ``for the purpose of
killing black men'';
(G) the May 26, 2017, attack in Portland, Oregon, in which
a white supremacist allegedly murdered 2 men and injured a
third after the men defended 2 young women whom the
individual had targeted with anti-Muslim hate speech; and
(H) the August 12, 2017, attack in Charlottesville,
Virginia, in which a white supremacist allegedly killed 1 and
injured 19 after driving his car through a crowd of
individuals protesting a neo-Nazi rally, and of which
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said, ``It does meet the
definition of domestic terrorism in our statute.''.
(6) The Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism found
that right-wing extremists were responsible for 150 terrorist
acts, attempted acts, and plots and conspiracies that took
place in the United States between 1993 and 2017. These
attacks resulted in the deaths of 255 people and injured more
than 600.
(7) According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, in 2015,
for the first time in 5 years, the number of hate groups in
the United States rose by 14 percent. The increase included a
more than twofold rise in the number of Ku Klux Klan
chapters. The number of anti-government militias and
``patriot'' groups also grew by 14 percent in 2015.
(8) In November 2017, the Federal Bureau of Investigation
released its annual hate crime incident report, which found
that in 2016, hate crimes increased by almost 5 percent,
including a 19 percent rise in hate crimes against American
Muslims. Similarly, the previous year's report found that in
2015, hate crimes increased by 6 percent. Much of that
increase came from a 66 percent rise in attacks on American
Muslims. In both reports, race-based crimes were most
numerous; more than 50 percent of those hate crimes targeted
African Americans.
(9) In January 2017, a right-wing extremist who had
expressed anti-Muslim views was
[[Page S7300]]
charged with murder for allegedly killing 6 people and
injuring 19 in a shooting rampage at a mosque in Quebec City,
Canada. It was the first-ever mass shooting at a mosque in
North America, and Prime Minister Trudeau labeled it a
terrorist attack.
(10) Between January and July 2017, news reports found 63
incidents in which American mosques were targeted by threats,
vandalism, or arson.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act--
(1) the term ``Director'' means the Director of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation;
(2) the term ``domestic terrorism'' has the meaning given
the term in section 2331 of title 18, United States Code;
(3) the term ``Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee''
means the committee within the Department of Justice tasked
with assessing and sharing information about ongoing domestic
terrorism threats; and
(4) the term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of Homeland
Security.
SEC. 4. OFFICES TO COMBAT DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
(a) Authorization of Offices to Monitor, Analyze,
Investigate, and Prosecute Domestic Terrorism.--
(1) Domestic terrorism unit.--There is authorized a
Domestic Terrorism Unit in the Office of Intelligence and
Analysis of the Department of Homeland Security, which shall
be responsible for monitoring and analyzing domestic
terrorism activity.
(2) Domestic terrorism office.--There is authorized a
Domestic Terrorism Office in the Counterterrorism Section of
the National Security Division of the Department of Justice--
(A) which shall be responsible for investigating and
prosecuting incidents of domestic terrorism; and
(B) which shall be headed by the Domestic Terrorism
Counsel.
(3) Domestic terrorism section of the fbi.--There is
authorized a Domestic Terrorism Section within the
Counterterrorism Division of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, which shall be responsible for investigating
domestic terrorism activity.
(b) Joint Report on Domestic Terrorism.--
(1) Annual report required.--Not later than 180 days after
the date of enactment of this Act, and each year thereafter,
the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and
the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation shall
submit a joint report authored by the domestic terrorism
offices authorized under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of
subsection (a) to--
(A) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Select
Committee on Intelligence of the Senate; and
(B) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on
Homeland Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence of the House of Representatives.
(2) Contents.--Each report submitted under paragraph (1)
shall include--
(A) an assessment of the domestic terrorism threat posed by
white supremacists, including white supremacist infiltration
and recruitment of law enforcement officers and members of
the Armed Forces;
(B)(i) in the first report, an analysis of incidents or
attempted incidents of domestic terrorism that have occurred
in the United States since April 19, 1995; and
(ii) in each subsequent report, an analysis of incidents or
attempted incidents of domestic terrorism that occurred in
the United States during the preceding year; and
(C) a quantitative analysis of domestic terrorism for the
preceding year, including the number of--
(i) domestic terrorism related assessments initiated by the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, including the number of
assessments from each classification and subcategory;
(ii) domestic terrorism related preliminary investigations
initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including
the number of preliminary investigations from each
classification and subcategory, and how many preliminary
investigations resulted from assessments;
(iii) domestic terrorism related full investigations
initiated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, including
the number of full investigations from each classification
and subcategory, and how many full investigations resulted
from preliminary investigations and assessments;
(iv) domestic terrorism related incidents, including the
number of incidents from each classification and subcategory,
the number of deaths and injuries resulting from each
incident, and a detailed explanation of each incident;
(v) Federal domestic terrorism related arrests, including
the number of arrests from each classification and
subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each arrest;
(vi) Federal domestic terrorism related indictments,
including the number of indictments from each classification
and subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each
indictment;
(vii) Federal domestic terrorism related prosecutions,
including the number of incidents from each classification
and subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each
prosecution;
(viii) Federal domestic terrorism related convictions,
including the number of convictions from each classification
and subcategory, and a detailed explanation of each
conviction; and
(ix) Federal domestic terrorism related weapons recoveries,
including the number of each type of weapon and the number of
weapons from each classification and subcategory.
(3) Classification and public release.--Each report
submitted under paragraph (1) shall be--
(A) unclassified, to the greatest extent possible, with a
classified annex only if necessary; and
(B) in the case of the unclassified portion of the report,
posted on the public websites of the Department of Homeland
Security, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation.
(c) Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee.--There is
authorized a Domestic Terrorism Executive Committee, which
shall--
(1) meet on a regular basis, and not less regularly than 4
times each year, to coordinate with United States Attorneys
and other key public safety officials across the country to
promote information sharing and ensure an effective,
responsive, and organized joint effort to combat domestic
terrorism; and
(2) be co-chaired by--
(A) the Domestic Terrorism Counsel authorized under
subsection (a)(2)(B);
(B) a United States Attorney or Assistant United States
Attorney;
(C) a member of the National Security Division of the
Department of Justice; and
(D) a member of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
(d) Focus on Greatest Threats.--The domestic terrorism
offices authorized under paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of
subsection (a) shall focus their limited resources on the
most significant domestic terrorism threats, as determined by
the number of domestic terrorism related incidents from each
category and subclassification in the joint report for the
preceding year required under subsection (b).
SEC. 5. TRAINING TO COMBAT DOMESTIC TERRORISM.
(a) Required Training and Resources.--The State and Local
Anti-Terrorism Program, funded by the Bureau of Justice
Assistance of the Department of Justice, shall include
training and resources to assist State, local, and tribal law
enforcement officers in understanding, detecting, deterring,
and investigating acts of domestic terrorism. The training
shall focus on the most significant domestic terrorism
threats, as determined by the quantitative analysis in the
joint report required under section 4(b).
(b) Requirement.--Any individual who provides domestic
terrorism training required under this section shall have--
(1) expertise in domestic terrorism; and
(2) relevant academic, law enforcement, or other experience
in matters related to domestic terrorism.
(c) Report.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
enactment of this Act and once each year thereafter, the
Director of the Bureau of Justice Assistance shall submit an
annual report to the committees of Congress described in
section 4(b)(1) on the domestic terrorism training
implemented under this section, which shall include copies of
all training materials used and the names and qualifications
of the individuals who provide the training.
(2) Classification.--Each report submitted under paragraph
(1) shall be unclassified, to the greatest extent possible,
with a classified annex only if necessary.
SEC. 6. COMBATTING DOMESTIC TERRORISM THROUGH JOINT TERRORISM
TASK FORCES AND FUSION CENTERS.
(a) In General.--The joint terrorism task forces of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and State, local, and
regional fusion centers, as established under section 210A of
the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 124h), shall
each, in coordination with the Domestic Terrorism Executive
Committee and the domestic terrorism offices authorized under
paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of section 4(a) of this Act--
(1) share intelligence to address domestic terrorism
activities;
(2) conduct an annual, intelligence-based assessment of
domestic terrorism activities in their jurisdictions; and
(3) formulate and execute a plan to address and combat
domestic terrorism activities in their jurisdictions.
(b) Requirement.--The activities required under subsection
(a) shall focus on the most significant domestic terrorism
threats, as determined by the number of domestic terrorism
related incidents from each category and subclassification in
the joint report for the preceding year required under
section 4(b).
SEC. 7. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department
of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the
Department of Homeland Security such sums as may be necessary
to carry out this Act.
______
By Mr. DAINES (for himself and Mr. Tester):
S. 2149. A bill to make a technical correction to the provision of
law authorizing a withdrawal and reservation of public land at
Limestone Hills Training Area, Montana; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of
the bill be printed in the Record.
[[Page S7301]]
There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be
printed in the Record, as follows:
S. 2149
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. TECHNICAL CORRECTION TO WITHDRAWAL AND RESERVATION
OF PUBLIC LAND AUTHORITY, LIMESTONE HILLS
TRAINING AREA, MONTANA.
Section 2931(b) of the Military Construction Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (division B of Public Law 113-66;
127 Stat. 1031) is amended by striking ``18,644 acres in
Broadwater County, Montana, generally depicted as `Proposed
Land Withdrawal' on the map entitled `Limestone Hills
Training Area Land Withdrawal', dated April 10, 2013'' and
inserting ``18,964 acres in Broadwater County, Montana,
generally depicted as `Limestone Hills Training Area Land
Withdrawal' on the map entitled `Limestone Hills Training
Area Land Withdrawal', dated May 11, 2017''.
______
By Mr. DURBIN (for himself, Mr. King, Mr. Brown, Mr. Franken, Ms.
Hassan, and Ms. Harris):
S. 2157. A bill to require drug manufacturers to disclose the prices
of prescription drugs in any direct-to-consumer advertising and
marketing to practitioners of a drug; to the Committee on Health,
Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. DURBIN. 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. 2157
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 ``Drug-Price Transparency in
Communications Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress finds as follows:
(1) Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription
pharmaceuticals is legal in only 2 developed countries, the
United States and New Zealand.
(2) Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription
pharmaceuticals is designed to cause patients to pressure
physicians to prescribe certain medications.
(3) In 2015, pharmaceutical companies spent more than
$100,000,000 on advertising with respect to each of 16 brand-
name drugs, primarily new and expensive drugs.
(4) Prescription rates of medications advertised directly
to consumers have increased by 34.2 percent compared to a 5.1
percent increase in other pharmaceuticals.
(5) Prescription pharmaceuticals cost more in the United
States than they do in any other country.
(6) The American Medical Association has passed
resolutions calling for the ban of direct-to-consumer
advertising of prescription pharmaceuticals, and to require
price transparency in any direct-to-consumer advertising.
(7) The amount of spending by pharmaceutical companies in
marketing to health care providers is more than 4 times the
spending for direct-to-consumer advertising.
(8) Health care providers are more likely to prescribe a
certain drug if they have received payments or marketing
materials from the manufacturer of that drug.
SEC. 3. PRICE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT FOR DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER
DRUG ADVERTISEMENTS.
(a) In General.--Section 303(g)(1) of the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 333(g)(1)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(A)'' and inserting ``(i)'';
(2) by striking ``(B)'' and inserting (ii);
(3) by striking ``(1) With respect'' and inserting
``(1)(A) With respect'';
(4) by striking ``this paragraph'' each place it appears
and inserting ``this subparagraph'';
(5) by striking ``No other civil monetary penalties in
this Act (including the civil penalty in section 303(f)(4))''
and inserting ``No civil monetary penalties (including the
civil penalty in section 303(f)(4)), other than the penalties
under this subparagraph and subparagraph (B)''; and
(6) by adding at the end the following:
``(B) With respect to a person who is a holder of an
approved application under section 505 for a drug subject to
section 503(b) or under section 351 of the Public Health
Service Act, any such person who disseminates or causes
another party to disseminate a direct-to-consumer
advertisement that does not include the wholesale acquisition
cost (as defined in section 1847A(c)(6)(B) of the Social
Security Act) for a 30-day supply of the drug shall be liable
to the United States for a civil penalty in an amount not to
exceed $1,000,000 for the first such violation in any 3-year
period, and not to exceed $5,000,000 for each subsequent
violation in any 3-year period. For purposes of this
subparagraph, all violations under this paragraph occurring
in a single day shall be considered one violation. With
respect to advertisements that appear in magazines or other
publications that are published less frequently than daily,
each issue date (whether weekly or monthly) shall be treated
as a single day for the purpose of calculating the number of
violations under this subparagraph.''.
(b) Transfer of Funds.--For each fiscal year, there are
authorized to be appropriated, and are appropriated, out of
any funds not otherwise obligated, to the Director of the
National Institutes of Health for purposes of carrying out
medical research, an amount equal to the amount collected in
penalties during the previous fiscal year for violations of
section 303(g)(1)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act.
(c) Regulations.--The Secretary of Health and Human
Services, acting through the Commissioner of Food and Drugs,
shall promulgate regulations to carry out subparagraph (B) of
section 303(g)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(21 U.S.C. 333(g)(1)), as added by subsection (a). Such
regulations shall include provisions setting forth--
(1) a reasonable amount of time a manufacturer has to
update any direct-to-consumer advertising of a drug in
accordance with such subparagraph (B) after a change to the
wholesale acquisition cost of the drug; and
(2) the specific manner in which the wholesale
acquisition cost of a drug is required to be conspicuously
disclosed in such direct-to-consumer advertisements in order
to communicate such single price metric to the public, which
shall include visual and audio (as applicable) components of
the advertisement, and which may include a brief qualitative
explanation of reduced cost availability for certain
consumers, such as through insurance cost-sharing
arrangements or patient assistance programs.
SEC. 4. DRUG MANUFACTURER DUTY TO DISCLOSE DRUG PRICES TO
PRACTITIONERS.
(a) Duty to Disclose.--Whenever a drug manufacturer,
including any representative of the manufacturer,
communicates with a health care practitioner about a drug
manufactured by the drug manufacturer, including through
promotional, educational, or marketing communications,
meetings or paid events, and the provision of goods, gifts,
and samples, the drug manufacturer shall disclose to the
practitioner the wholesale acquisition cost (as defined in
section 1847A(c)(6)(B) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1395w-3a(c)(6)(B))) for a 30-day supply of the drug, which
may include a brief qualitative explanation of reduced cost
availability for certain consumers that is consistent with
the regulations described in section 3(c)(2).
(b) Enforcement by Federal Trade Commission.--
(1) Unfair or deceptive acts or practices.--A violation
of subsection (a) by a person with respect to whom the
Commission is empowered under section 5(a)(2) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 45(a)(2)) shall be treated as
a violation of a rule defining an unfair or deceptive act or
practice prescribed under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)).
(2) Powers of federal trade commission.--
(A) In general.--The Federal Trade Commission shall
enforce this section in the same manner, by the same means,
and with the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though
all applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade
Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into
and made a part of this Act.
(B) Privileges and immunities.--Any person who violates
this section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled
to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal
Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.).
(c) Rulemaking.--The Federal Trade Commission shall
promulgate in accordance with section 553 of title 5, United
States Code, such rules as may be necessary to carry out this
section.
(d) Savings Provision.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to limit, impair, or supersede the operation of the
Federal Trade Commission Act or any other provision of
Federal law.
______
By Mr. DAINES (for himself, Mr. Risch, and Mr. Crapo):
S. 2160. A bill to establish a pilot program under the Chief of the
Forest Service may use alternative dispute resolution in lieu of
judicial review of certain projects; to the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources.
Mr. DAINES. 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. 2160
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 ``Protect Collaboration for
Healthier Forests Act''.
SEC. 2. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PILOT PROGRAM.
(a) Definitions.--In this Act:
(1) Participant.--The term ``participant'' means an
individual or entity that files an objection or scoping
comments on a draft environmental document with respect to a
project that is subject to an objection at the project level
under part 218 of title 36, Code
[[Page S7302]]
of Federal Regulations (or successor regulations).
(2) Pilot program.--The term ``pilot program'' means the
pilot program established under subsection (b).
(3) Project.--The term ``project'' means a project
described in subsection (c).
(4) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest
Service.
(b) Arbitration Pilot Program.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall
establish within Region 1 of the Forest Service an
arbitration pilot program as an alternative dispute
resolution process in lieu of judicial review for projects
described in subsection (c).
(c) Description of Projects.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary, at the sole discretion of
the Secretary, may designate for arbitration projects that--
(A)(i) are developed through a collaborative process
(within the meaning of section 603(b)(1)(C) of the Healthy
Forest Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6591b(b)(1)(C)));
(ii) are carried out under the Collaborative Forest
Landscape Restoration Program established under section 4003
of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (16 U.S.C.
7303); or
(iii) are identified in a community wildfire protection
plan (as defined in section 101 of the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6511));
(B) have as a purpose--
(i) hazardous fuels reduction; or
(ii) mitigation of insect or disease infestation; and
(C) are located, in whole or in part, in a wildland-urban
interface (as defined in section 101 of the Healthy Forests
Restoration Act of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6511)).
(2) Inclusion.--In designating projects for arbitration,
the Secretary may include projects that receive categorical
exclusions for purposes of the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
(d) Limitation on Number of Projects.--The Secretary may
not designate for arbitration under the pilot program more
than 2 projects per calendar year.
(e) Arbitrators.--
(1) Appointment.--The Secretary shall develop and publish a
list of not fewer than 15 individuals eligible to serve as
arbitrators for the pilot program.
(2) Qualifications.--To be eligible to serve as an
arbitrator under this subsection, an individual shall be--
(A) certified by--
(i) the American Arbitration Association; or
(ii) a State arbitration program; or
(B) a fully retired Federal or State judge.
(f) Initiation of Arbitration.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 7 days after the date on
which the Secretary issues the final decision with respect to
a project, the Secretary shall--
(A) notify each applicable participant and the Clerk of the
United States District Court for the district in which the
project is located that the project has been designated for
arbitration in accordance with this Act; and
(B) include in the decision document a statement that the
project has been designated for arbitration.
(2) Initiation.--
(A) In general.--A participant may initiate arbitration
regarding a project that has been designated for arbitration
under this Act in accordance with--
(i) sections 571 through 584 of title 5, United States
Code; and
(ii) this paragraph.
(B) Requirements.--A request to initiate arbitration under
subparagraph (A) shall--
(i) be filed not later than the date that is 30 days after
the date of the notification by the Secretary under paragraph
(1); and
(ii) include an alternative proposal for the applicable
project that describes each modification sought by the
participant with respect to the project.
(C) No judicial review.--A project for which arbitration is
initiated under subparagraph (A) shall not be subject to
judicial review.
(3) Compelled arbitration.--
(A) Motion to compel arbitration.--
(i) In general.--If a participant seeks judicial review of
a final decision with respect to a project, the Secretary may
file in the applicable court a motion to compel arbitration
in accordance with this Act.
(ii) Fees and costs.--For any motion described in clause
(i) for which the Secretary is the prevailing party, the
applicable court shall award to the Secretary--
(I) court costs; and
(II) attorney's fees.
(B) Arbitration compelled by court.--If a participant seeks
judicial review of a project, the applicable court shall
compel arbitration in accordance with this Act.
(g) Selection of Arbitrator.--For each arbitration
commenced under this Act--
(1) the Secretary shall propose 3 arbitrators from the list
published under subsection (e)(1); and
(2) the applicable participant shall select 1 arbitrator
from the list of arbitrators proposed under paragraph (1).
(h) Responsibilities of Arbitrator.--
(1) In general.--An arbitrator selected under subsection
(e)--
(A) shall address all claims of each party seeking
arbitration with respect to a project under this Act; but
(B) may consolidate into a single arbitration all requests
to initiate arbitration by all participants with respect to a
project.
(2) Selection of proposals.--An arbitrator shall make a
decision with respect to each applicable request for
initiation of arbitration under this Act by--
(A) selecting the project, as approved by the Secretary;
(B) selecting an alternative proposal submitted by the
applicable participant; or
(C) rejecting both projects described in subparagraphs (A)
and (B).
(3) Limitations.--
(A) Administrative record.--The evidence before an
arbitrator under this subsection shall be limited solely to
the administrative record for the project.
(B) No modifications to proposals.--An arbitrator may not
modify any proposal contained in a request for initiation of
arbitration of a participant under this Act.
(i) Intervention.--A party may intervene in an arbitration
under this Act if, with respect to the project to which the
arbitration relates, the party--
(1) meets the requirements of Rule 24(a) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure (or a successor rule); or
(2) participated in the applicable collaborative process
referred to in clause (i) or (ii) of subsection (c)(1)(A).
(j) Scope of Review.--In carrying out arbitration for a
project, the arbitrator shall set aside the agency action,
findings, and conclusions found to be arbitrary, capricious,
an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with
law, within the meaning of section 706(2)(A) of title 5,
United States Code.
(k) Deadline for Completion of Arbitration.--Not later than
90 days after the date on which a request to initiate
arbitration is filed under subsection (f)(2), the arbitrator
shall make a decision with respect to the request to initiate
arbitration.
(l) Effect of Arbitration Decision.--A decision of an
arbitrator under this Act--
(1) shall not be considered to be a major Federal action;
(2) shall be binding; and
(3) shall not be subject to judicial review, except as
provided in section 10(a) of title 9, United States Code.
(m) Administrative Costs.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
(A) be solely responsible for the professional fees of
arbitrators participating in the pilot program; and
(B) use funds made available to the Secretary and not
otherwise obligated to carry out subparagraph (A).
(2) Attorney's fees.--No arbitrator may award attorney's
fees in any arbitration brought under this Act.
(n) Reports.--
(1) In general.--Not later than 1 year after the date on
which the pilot program is established, and annually
thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee
on Natural Resources of the House of Representatives, and
publish on the website of Region 1 of the Forest Service, a
report of not longer than 10 pages describing the
implementation of the pilot program for the applicable year,
including--
(A) the reasons for selecting certain projects for
arbitration;
(B) an evaluation of the arbitration process, including any
recommendations for improvements to the process;
(C) a description of the outcome of each arbitration; and
(D) a summary of the impacts of each outcome described in
subparagraph (C) on the timeline for implementation and
completion of the applicable project.
(2) GAO reviews and reports.--
(A) Initial review.--Not later than 2 years after the date
on which the pilot program is established, the Comptroller
General of the United States shall review the implementation
by the Secretary of the pilot program.
(B) Review on termination.--On termination of the pilot
program under subsection (o), the Comptroller General of the
United States shall review the implementation by the
Secretary of the pilot program.
(C) Report.--On completion of the review described in
subparagraph (A) or (B), the Comptroller General of the
United States shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture,
Nutrition, and Forestry and the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Natural
Resources of the House of Representatives a report describing
the results of the applicable review.
(o) Termination.--The pilot program shall terminate on the
date that is 5 years after the date .
(p) Effect.--Nothing in this Act affects the responsibility
of the Secretary to comply with--
(1) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.); or
(2) the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
[[Page S7303]]
____________________